4 ms·

It's becoming clear that their values are completely different from the west. Unfortunately the problem is that consumers here love low prices, but they also lo

It's becoming clear that their values are completely different from the west. Unfortunately the problem is that consumers here love low prices, but they also love employment rights, social security, free healthcare and other signs of an advanced civilisation - which costs money. The hypocrisy of the society is that they don't care if the product they buy was made in a country that don't respect human rights and was probably made by forced labour or children. As long as they don't see the exploitation, then it does not bother them. Unfortunately, it is not possible to create a campaign that would show consumers how they are condoning human rights abuse by buying these products, because big corporations would have to lose a big stream of money. I would love to see the law changed, so that companies would have to print country of origin of the product, and additional information kind of when you buy eggs, you can see if it is from free range hens or caged. So it should be mandatory to write if product was made using forced labour, children or low paid workers. Next step, I would like to see mandatory filters in online stores, where you could filter out products made in countries that abuse human rights. If you want to buy something on Amazon, that is not coming from China it is extremely time consuming - it should be easy. Finally, products coming from such countries should have a levy, so that the cost of making product in China would be similar as if it was done locally. If we are going to continue supporting China, all the things that they do, will become appealing to sociopathic politicians here and eventually they'll be copying it.

Iolaum 6y ago
Governments could always impose tariffs to countries that have lower standards on the issues you mentioned and level the planefield. Unfortunately in practice other considerations get more weight.
throwaway3699 6y ago
> The hypocrisy of the society is that they don't care if the product they buy was made in a country that don't respect human rights and was probably made by forced labour or children. As long as they don't see the exploitation, then it does not bother them. I care, but the situation is much like conflict minerals. China is going to be relevant in the supply chain of almost any technological product, or at the very least, the tools that went into making it. Personally I would pay double for products to avoid China, but I do not believe most people can even afford that trade-off if it was practical (and didn't require heaps of upfront research when buying everything from washing machines to batteries).
billytetrud 6y ago
I think looking at the "new IP" proposal and concluding that "the Chinese have really different values then the west" is myopic. The chinese government is authoritarian and has a clear agenda. Assuming it reflects the values of the people is stupid. The chinese people may be goaded into nationalism and tricked (via propaganda) or pressured into supporting the government, but I think it's not correct to conclude from the government's actions anything about the people's values
- hans789 6y ago
  I think the propaganda is on the other side. The government gained support over its recent initiatives in building strong economy, city infrastructure projects, vastly improved public services which affects most people’s daily routines.
  - billytetrud 6y ago
    Yes, people like it when their lives improve. Sure this has convinced some people the chinese government is doing a good job and will continue to do a good job. But they doesn't change the values of those people. The chinese government is a draconian dystopia. Saying "the propaganda is on the other side" implies that the Chinese government doesn't do propaganda, which is a pretty stupid thing to imply in my opinion. Dictatorships like China do not generally do well for their people for very long.
xyzzy123 6y ago
The complex reality of global supply chains works against this. We would have to further "break" the fungibility of goods and money to truly enforce this, and ensure we have full provenance and reporting along the supply chain. This does exist in a lot of cases but is complex to enforce and subject to laundering. Chips from X, materials from Y, finished in country Z. Of course complex modern products can have hundreds of suppliers or more in a tree fanning backwards. Compositions backwards in supply chain can change quickly based on cost of materials or output of Bangalore factory vs Taiwan factory in a particular month, for example. "Comes from China" is not a binary proposition and if you try to assign a percentage you can come up with many different numbers, all of which can vary over time. Also, is Taiwan part of China in the labelling scheme? Who makes the decision that e.g. Xinjiang uses slave labour? Is the information provided to the consumer "value neutral" and then you provide a lens on top? Or is there a political body writing the values? Who, exactly? If it's an international forum, is China invited? Consumers might want to decide based on their sense of global justice, their environmental awareness, their opposition to authoritarian regimes, the presence/absence of potentially harmful substances, religious preference or along many other axes. Companies with ESG frameworks are having a bear of a time just eliminating e.g. modern slavery from their supply chains, and they have a bunch of leverage with their suppliers and more insight than their customers. I don't like the lack of information about what we buy either but I'm not sure that fully politicising every purchase is an easy answer.
- sroussey 6y ago
  You could automate product filtering so you only ever see those that meet your personal ESG preferences. Such smart filters could eventually use supply-chain blockchains for verification.

Iolaum 6y ago

Governments could always impose tariffs to countries that have lower standards on the issues you mentioned and level the planefield. Unfortunately in practice other considerations get more weight.

throwaway3699 6y ago

> The hypocrisy of the society is that they don't care if the product they buy was made in a country that don't respect human rights and was probably made by forced labour or children. As long as they don't see the exploitation, then it does not bother them. I care, but the situation is much like conflict minerals. China is going to be relevant in the supply chain of almost any technological product, or at the very least, the tools that went into making it. Personally I would pay double for products to avoid China, but I do not believe most people can even afford that trade-off if it was practical (and didn't require heaps of upfront research when buying everything from washing machines to batteries).

billytetrud 6y ago

I think looking at the "new IP" proposal and concluding that "the Chinese have really different values then the west" is myopic. The chinese government is authoritarian and has a clear agenda. Assuming it reflects the values of the people is stupid. The chinese people may be goaded into nationalism and tricked (via propaganda) or pressured into supporting the government, but I think it's not correct to conclude from the government's actions anything about the people's values

hans789 6y ago
I think the propaganda is on the other side. The government gained support over its recent initiatives in building strong economy, city infrastructure projects, vastly improved public services which affects most people’s daily routines.
- billytetrud 6y ago
  Yes, people like it when their lives improve. Sure this has convinced some people the chinese government is doing a good job and will continue to do a good job. But they doesn't change the values of those people. The chinese government is a draconian dystopia. Saying "the propaganda is on the other side" implies that the Chinese government doesn't do propaganda, which is a pretty stupid thing to imply in my opinion. Dictatorships like China do not generally do well for their people for very long.

xyzzy123 6y ago

The complex reality of global supply chains works against this. We would have to further "break" the fungibility of goods and money to truly enforce this, and ensure we have full provenance and reporting along the supply chain. This does exist in a lot of cases but is complex to enforce and subject to laundering. Chips from X, materials from Y, finished in country Z. Of course complex modern products can have hundreds of suppliers or more in a tree fanning backwards. Compositions backwards in supply chain can change quickly based on cost of materials or output of Bangalore factory vs Taiwan factory in a particular month, for example. "Comes from China" is not a binary proposition and if you try to assign a percentage you can come up with many different numbers, all of which can vary over time. Also, is Taiwan part of China in the labelling scheme? Who makes the decision that e.g. Xinjiang uses slave labour? Is the information provided to the consumer "value neutral" and then you provide a lens on top? Or is there a political body writing the values? Who, exactly? If it's an international forum, is China invited? Consumers might want to decide based on their sense of global justice, their environmental awareness, their opposition to authoritarian regimes, the presence/absence of potentially harmful substances, religious preference or along many other axes. Companies with ESG frameworks are having a bear of a time just eliminating e.g. modern slavery from their supply chains, and they have a bunch of leverage with their suppliers and more insight than their customers. I don't like the lack of information about what we buy either but I'm not sure that fully politicising every purchase is an easy answer.

sroussey 6y ago
You could automate product filtering so you only ever see those that meet your personal ESG preferences. Such smart filters could eventually use supply-chain blockchains for verification.