8 ms·

Personally, I'm most angry that Intel refuses to properly audit their suppliers. They're not actually banned from importing goods from Xinjiang if they can prov

by yorwba 5y ago

Personally, I'm most angry that Intel refuses to properly audit their suppliers. They're not actually banned from importing goods from Xinjiang if they can prove that they weren't made with forced labor. If they could prove that, the US government should be happy (because their stated goal of combating forced labor is respected) and Chinese people should be happy, too (better working conditions). Merely restricting suppliers based on geography is a non-solution, since it's not like forced labor magically stops if you cross a provincial border.

FooBarWidget 5y ago
I don't think it's that simple. For example BCI performed multiple audits since 2012 and hasn't found a single case of forced labor.[1][2] Despite that, they've pulled back from Xinjiang. Companies don't want to deal with Xinjiang just so they can avoid controversies, regardless of actual facts. Also, the Xinjiang Forced Labor Prevention Act is based on the maxim of guilty-until-proven-innocent. There is no way to conclusively prove a negative. Even if you perform 100 unannounced audits you can still say "oh there's 0.001% chance that they fooled you 100 times" 1 https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1375456747477815296 https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1375456747477815296 2 https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-03-26/BCI-s-China-office-No-forced-labor-found-in-Xinjiang-YWR18lkjy8/index.html https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-03-26/BCI-s-China-office-No-...
- jedimind 5y ago
  - FooBarWidget 5y ago
    Right. Here, check this: https://apparelinsider.com/bci-shanghai-claims-audit-findings-were-ignored/ https://apparelinsider.com/bci-shanghai-claims-audit-finding... Just because people and outlets have a different opinion than you doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong, or "propagandists". Some people just have a different opinion, out of their own free will and independent thought, all right?
    - exo762 5y ago
      - FooBarWidget 5y ago
        Yes people can judge for themselves. Having said that, I believe I also have some say in how I think I should be judged, and that I am allowed to push back at others' attempts to put me in a box. I am not "pro-CCP". I only look that way because western mainstream media is so full of anti-China propaganda that anyone who deviates from mainstream opinion look like pro-CCP. (At this point, some will say "we are only against the CCP, not the Chinese people, and you are wrongly equating China with the CCP". I have written extensively in the past why such rethoric doesn't stand to scuritiny and merely covers up policies that will result in the real suffering of common Chinese people: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29358557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29358557) So no, I'm not a CCP supporter. What I am, is being tired of all the anti-China propaganda that's on the one hand merely biased and prejudiced misrepresentations, and on the other hand a deliberate manufacturing of consent for war. I am tired of my home being constantly misrepresented and villified. You are right that nobody knows my situation. So I will hereby give you a sworn statement, i.e. you can hold me accountable for it in a court of law if you find me to be lying: my family is not held hostage by Chinese forces, nobody from China is threatening me and my family, and everything I say is entirely my own opinion based on my own independent research without anybody paying me to say these things.
        mthoms 5y ago
        You may not be a paid shill (I’m certainly not accusing you of it - that would be against the rules) but your behaviour is indeed curious for someone who is trying to not look like one. For instance, why are you trying to get in touch with other HN’ers with a history of pro-China commentary? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29615344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29615344 Don’t be surprised that people are suspicious. And it’s not because of a difference of opinion - users here are very tolerant of that - it’s because of repeated behaviour (another example: avoiding answering difficult questions regarding the alleged sexual assault of Peng Shuai).
  - dang 5y ago
    If you break the HN guidelines this badly again we will ban you. They explicitly ask you not to post like this, for deep, clear, and long-established reasons (which can be summed up like this: well over 99.9% of internet complaints about astroturfing and shillage are demonstrably unfounded, and also full of poison that we don't want here). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html If you want further explanation, there's many years' worth at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... and you'll find other links there that go deeply into the matter.
    - fartcannon 5y ago
      So 99.9% of the internet is manipulating the minds of everyone on the internet. Some of those people come to HN and post/upvote/downvote, and as a result of their lives outside of HN, they regurgitate slightly filtered PR as opinions or facts on HN. I guess what I'm asking is, how do you guys deal with second hand shilling and PR?
      - dang 5y ago
        If you're asking how we deal with users who aren't consciously shilling but are regurgitating the effects of somebody else doing that, the answer is that there's no way to distinguish that case from the normal general case of people having strong opinions and/or being wrong about things—which is the default on the internet. All we can do is fall back on the general rules of the site (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). That means answering bad arguments with better arguments, and incorrect information with correct information, while remaining patient and respectful with each other, and seeking points to agree about as well as disagree [1]. When feelings are running high, of course, it can often be too hard to do that. In that case, there's a plan B: chalk it up to someone being wrong on the internet, let go, and walk away. When hot under the collar, wait to cool down before posting (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20hot%20collar&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). The internet is mostly wrong about most things anyhow. People sometimes object to this answer: isn't that just giving in to manipulation, or at least the effects of manipulation? There's a thought experiment that I find helpful here: imagine a Sufficiently Smart Manipulator (SSM) who is disingenuous and totally sinister, but also clever enough to reliably evade detection [2]. I think most people can agree that either SSMs already exist (and by definition, we're not clever enough to catch them), or soon will exist. So we're either facing this situation already, or had better get ready for it. What should we do in that case? The answer is that we should do what we ought to be doing anyway: answering bad arguments with better ones, bad information with better information, etc., while remaining in good connection with each other. It's in the interest of SSMs to divide and polarize the community, and it's in the community's interest not to let that happen, and instead to pool our energies to figure out the truth together [3]. The answer to the Sufficiently Smart Manipulator is the sufficiently healthy community [4]. The value of the SSM thought experiment is that it directs attention away from the question of detecting manipulators, which is notoriously unreliable (people succumb to all sorts of fantasies about this, and the evidence nearly always points the other way [4, 5]), and toward the question of what positive things we can do to build up a sort of immune system. There's no way to know whether it will work, but in the long run, and maybe the short run too, I don't see what other option we have. [1] The reason for that last bit is that it introduces a human, relational element into the argument, which makes it much easier for people to do curious, reflective conversation instead of reacting reflexively and hardening into battle mode (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23959679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23959679). [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=sufficiently%20smart%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... [3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20pg%20figure%20out%20the%20truth&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 [5] https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
- hker 5y ago
  You misrepresented BCI. And there are other independent sources showing forced labor in Xinjiang [1][2], regardless of what BCI Shanghai said. BCI Shanghai is contradicting the BCI headquarter [3], and BCI Shanghai is not credible on this matter [4]. While there are plenty of authentic reports, and investigations documented by independent research groups, the BCI Shanghai’s statement to deny the forced labor in the region makes us just think how much pressure the Chinese team of the group faces from the Chinese government. It is not that rare for a local Chinese branch to contradict the global headquarter, possibly due to pressure of operating in China. For example, the local Hugo Boss in China wrote statements on Weibo (supporting Xinjiang cotton) which contradicted the global Hugo Boss headquarter (stating that Hugo Boss does not use Xinjiang cotton) [5], and the headquarter clarified that the Chinese Weibo statement was unauthorized [6]. BCI Shanghai is in a similar situation: the local branch operating in Shanghai (claiming to find no forced labor) did not represent the headquarter [3]. The problem with what you cite is not (only) with the outlet (CGTN), but with the source (BCI Shanghai). You are like stating that Hugo Boss is supporting the Xinjiang cotton, because you find a Weibo post by the local office supporting it [5]. This is wrong [3][4][6]. And with other sources finding forced labor in Xinjiang [1][2], the BCI Shanghai statement is a red herring in this discussion. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/solar-china-climate-xinjiang-labor/2021/06/24/810abbd6-c903-11eb-8708-64991f2acf28_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/solar-chin... "Solar industry’s ties to China’s Xinjiang region raise specter of forced labor" [2]: https://www.shu.ac.uk/helena-kennedy-centre-international-justice/research-and-projects/all-projects/in-broad-daylight https://www.shu.ac.uk/helena-kennedy-centre-international-ju... "In Broad Daylight: Uyghur Forced Labour and Global Solar Supply Chains" [3]: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3127501/chinese-branch-better-cotton-initiative-challenges-headquarters https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3127501/chi... "Chinese branch of Better Cotton Initiative challenges headquarters and says it has found no evidence of Xinjiang forced labour" [4]: https://bitterwinter.org/better-cotton-initiative-why-its-shanghai-branch-is-not-credible/ https://bitterwinter.org/better-cotton-initiative-why-its-sh... "Better Cotton Initiative: Why Its Shanghai Branch is Not Credible" [5]: https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/26/hugo-boss-tells-chinese-customers-it-will-continue-to-purchase-xinjiang-cotton-months-after-telling-us-news-outlet-it-has-never-used-it/ https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/26/hugo-boss-tells-chinese-cu... "Hugo Boss tells Chinese customers it will continue to purchase Xinjiang cotton, whilst own website says it has never used it" [6]: https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/27/hugo-boss-statement-saying-it-will-purchase-and-support-xinjiang-cotton-was-unauthorised-brand-says/ https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/27/hugo-boss-statement-saying... "Hugo Boss statement saying it will ‘purchase and support’ Xinjiang cotton was ‘unauthorised,’ brand says" Edited: added links [1][2][3].
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  Given your background and opinions on the matter, I'd be interested to hear what you think goes on in the large, barbed-wire lined, centers they regularly ship Uyghurs in and out of. Do you think they are genuinely good places meant to help an under privileged minority group?
  - FooBarWidget 5y ago
    If you really want to know, feel free to reach out to me in private. See my profile. Twitter preferred.
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      What if I just 'kinda' want to know, for instance, in a comment thread?
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - FooBarWidget 5y ago
        Then I'll be brief. Check out this thread to get an idea: https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1465863939825221632 https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1465863939825221632 Check out Col Lawrence Wilkerson at the Ron Paul Institute, mark 22:20, on one of the reasons why the US was in Afghanistan (which borders Xinjiang): https://youtu.be/91wz5syVNZs?t=22m20s https://youtu.be/91wz5syVNZs?t=22m20s Check out Max Blumenthal, investigative journalist, on the quality of evidence surrounding Xinjiang: https://youtu.be/qZkxaEC1xjY https://youtu.be/qZkxaEC1xjY
        yorwba 5y ago
        You really must be quite westernized if you can't talk about China anymore without using the US as a reference point, and have to rely on Westerners spreading lies about China in service of their own agenda to speak for you.
chloerei 5y ago
Skechers is a good example. They conducted multiple inspections and found no forced labor, so they maintained business dealings with Chinese suppliers. https://about.skechers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/SKECHERS-USA-STATEMENT-UYGHURS-March-2021.pdf https://about.skechers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/SKECHE...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
splitstud 5y ago
Why would I ever import from a supplier whose only positive is price, if I have to go to extra effort and expense - making them no longer competitive in any respect?

by yorwba 5y ago

FooBarWidget 5y ago

I don't think it's that simple. For example BCI performed multiple audits since 2012 and hasn't found a single case of forced labor.[1][2] Despite that, they've pulled back from Xinjiang. Companies don't want to deal with Xinjiang just so they can avoid controversies, regardless of actual facts. Also, the Xinjiang Forced Labor Prevention Act is based on the maxim of guilty-until-proven-innocent. There is no way to conclusively prove a negative. Even if you perform 100 unannounced audits you can still say "oh there's 0.001% chance that they fooled you 100 times" 1 https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1375456747477815296 https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1375456747477815296 2 https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-03-26/BCI-s-China-office-No-forced-labor-found-in-Xinjiang-YWR18lkjy8/index.html https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-03-26/BCI-s-China-office-No-...

jedimind 5y ago
- FooBarWidget 5y ago
  Right. Here, check this: https://apparelinsider.com/bci-shanghai-claims-audit-findings-were-ignored/ https://apparelinsider.com/bci-shanghai-claims-audit-finding... Just because people and outlets have a different opinion than you doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong, or "propagandists". Some people just have a different opinion, out of their own free will and independent thought, all right?
  - exo762 5y ago
    - FooBarWidget 5y ago
      Yes people can judge for themselves. Having said that, I believe I also have some say in how I think I should be judged, and that I am allowed to push back at others' attempts to put me in a box. I am not "pro-CCP". I only look that way because western mainstream media is so full of anti-China propaganda that anyone who deviates from mainstream opinion look like pro-CCP. (At this point, some will say "we are only against the CCP, not the Chinese people, and you are wrongly equating China with the CCP". I have written extensively in the past why such rethoric doesn't stand to scuritiny and merely covers up policies that will result in the real suffering of common Chinese people: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29358557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29358557) So no, I'm not a CCP supporter. What I am, is being tired of all the anti-China propaganda that's on the one hand merely biased and prejudiced misrepresentations, and on the other hand a deliberate manufacturing of consent for war. I am tired of my home being constantly misrepresented and villified. You are right that nobody knows my situation. So I will hereby give you a sworn statement, i.e. you can hold me accountable for it in a court of law if you find me to be lying: my family is not held hostage by Chinese forces, nobody from China is threatening me and my family, and everything I say is entirely my own opinion based on my own independent research without anybody paying me to say these things.
      - mthoms 5y ago
        You may not be a paid shill (I’m certainly not accusing you of it - that would be against the rules) but your behaviour is indeed curious for someone who is trying to not look like one. For instance, why are you trying to get in touch with other HN’ers with a history of pro-China commentary? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29615344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29615344 Don’t be surprised that people are suspicious. And it’s not because of a difference of opinion - users here are very tolerant of that - it’s because of repeated behaviour (another example: avoiding answering difficult questions regarding the alleged sexual assault of Peng Shuai).
- dang 5y ago
  If you break the HN guidelines this badly again we will ban you. They explicitly ask you not to post like this, for deep, clear, and long-established reasons (which can be summed up like this: well over 99.9% of internet complaints about astroturfing and shillage are demonstrably unfounded, and also full of poison that we don't want here). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html If you want further explanation, there's many years' worth at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... and you'll find other links there that go deeply into the matter.
  - fartcannon 5y ago
    So 99.9% of the internet is manipulating the minds of everyone on the internet. Some of those people come to HN and post/upvote/downvote, and as a result of their lives outside of HN, they regurgitate slightly filtered PR as opinions or facts on HN. I guess what I'm asking is, how do you guys deal with second hand shilling and PR?
    - dang 5y ago
      If you're asking how we deal with users who aren't consciously shilling but are regurgitating the effects of somebody else doing that, the answer is that there's no way to distinguish that case from the normal general case of people having strong opinions and/or being wrong about things—which is the default on the internet. All we can do is fall back on the general rules of the site (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). That means answering bad arguments with better arguments, and incorrect information with correct information, while remaining patient and respectful with each other, and seeking points to agree about as well as disagree [1]. When feelings are running high, of course, it can often be too hard to do that. In that case, there's a plan B: chalk it up to someone being wrong on the internet, let go, and walk away. When hot under the collar, wait to cool down before posting (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20hot%20collar&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). The internet is mostly wrong about most things anyhow. People sometimes object to this answer: isn't that just giving in to manipulation, or at least the effects of manipulation? There's a thought experiment that I find helpful here: imagine a Sufficiently Smart Manipulator (SSM) who is disingenuous and totally sinister, but also clever enough to reliably evade detection [2]. I think most people can agree that either SSMs already exist (and by definition, we're not clever enough to catch them), or soon will exist. So we're either facing this situation already, or had better get ready for it. What should we do in that case? The answer is that we should do what we ought to be doing anyway: answering bad arguments with better ones, bad information with better information, etc., while remaining in good connection with each other. It's in the interest of SSMs to divide and polarize the community, and it's in the community's interest not to let that happen, and instead to pool our energies to figure out the truth together [3]. The answer to the Sufficiently Smart Manipulator is the sufficiently healthy community [4]. The value of the SSM thought experiment is that it directs attention away from the question of detecting manipulators, which is notoriously unreliable (people succumb to all sorts of fantasies about this, and the evidence nearly always points the other way [4, 5]), and toward the question of what positive things we can do to build up a sort of immune system. There's no way to know whether it will work, but in the long run, and maybe the short run too, I don't see what other option we have. [1] The reason for that last bit is that it introduces a human, relational element into the argument, which makes it much easier for people to do curious, reflective conversation instead of reacting reflexively and hardening into battle mode (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23959679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23959679). [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=sufficiently%20smart%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... [3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20pg%20figure%20out%20the%20truth&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 [5] https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
hker 5y ago
You misrepresented BCI. And there are other independent sources showing forced labor in Xinjiang [1][2], regardless of what BCI Shanghai said. BCI Shanghai is contradicting the BCI headquarter [3], and BCI Shanghai is not credible on this matter [4]. While there are plenty of authentic reports, and investigations documented by independent research groups, the BCI Shanghai’s statement to deny the forced labor in the region makes us just think how much pressure the Chinese team of the group faces from the Chinese government. It is not that rare for a local Chinese branch to contradict the global headquarter, possibly due to pressure of operating in China. For example, the local Hugo Boss in China wrote statements on Weibo (supporting Xinjiang cotton) which contradicted the global Hugo Boss headquarter (stating that Hugo Boss does not use Xinjiang cotton) [5], and the headquarter clarified that the Chinese Weibo statement was unauthorized [6]. BCI Shanghai is in a similar situation: the local branch operating in Shanghai (claiming to find no forced labor) did not represent the headquarter [3]. The problem with what you cite is not (only) with the outlet (CGTN), but with the source (BCI Shanghai). You are like stating that Hugo Boss is supporting the Xinjiang cotton, because you find a Weibo post by the local office supporting it [5]. This is wrong [3][4][6]. And with other sources finding forced labor in Xinjiang [1][2], the BCI Shanghai statement is a red herring in this discussion. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/solar-china-climate-xinjiang-labor/2021/06/24/810abbd6-c903-11eb-8708-64991f2acf28_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/solar-chin... "Solar industry’s ties to China’s Xinjiang region raise specter of forced labor" [2]: https://www.shu.ac.uk/helena-kennedy-centre-international-justice/research-and-projects/all-projects/in-broad-daylight https://www.shu.ac.uk/helena-kennedy-centre-international-ju... "In Broad Daylight: Uyghur Forced Labour and Global Solar Supply Chains" [3]: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3127501/chinese-branch-better-cotton-initiative-challenges-headquarters https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3127501/chi... "Chinese branch of Better Cotton Initiative challenges headquarters and says it has found no evidence of Xinjiang forced labour" [4]: https://bitterwinter.org/better-cotton-initiative-why-its-shanghai-branch-is-not-credible/ https://bitterwinter.org/better-cotton-initiative-why-its-sh... "Better Cotton Initiative: Why Its Shanghai Branch is Not Credible" [5]: https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/26/hugo-boss-tells-chinese-customers-it-will-continue-to-purchase-xinjiang-cotton-months-after-telling-us-news-outlet-it-has-never-used-it/ https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/26/hugo-boss-tells-chinese-cu... "Hugo Boss tells Chinese customers it will continue to purchase Xinjiang cotton, whilst own website says it has never used it" [6]: https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/27/hugo-boss-statement-saying-it-will-purchase-and-support-xinjiang-cotton-was-unauthorised-brand-says/ https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/27/hugo-boss-statement-saying... "Hugo Boss statement saying it will ‘purchase and support’ Xinjiang cotton was ‘unauthorised,’ brand says" Edited: added links [1][2][3].
BobbyJo 5y ago
Given your background and opinions on the matter, I'd be interested to hear what you think goes on in the large, barbed-wire lined, centers they regularly ship Uyghurs in and out of. Do you think they are genuinely good places meant to help an under privileged minority group?
- FooBarWidget 5y ago
  If you really want to know, feel free to reach out to me in private. See my profile. Twitter preferred.
  - BobbyJo 5y ago
    What if I just 'kinda' want to know, for instance, in a comment thread?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - FooBarWidget 5y ago
      Then I'll be brief. Check out this thread to get an idea: https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1465863939825221632 https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1465863939825221632 Check out Col Lawrence Wilkerson at the Ron Paul Institute, mark 22:20, on one of the reasons why the US was in Afghanistan (which borders Xinjiang): https://youtu.be/91wz5syVNZs?t=22m20s https://youtu.be/91wz5syVNZs?t=22m20s Check out Max Blumenthal, investigative journalist, on the quality of evidence surrounding Xinjiang: https://youtu.be/qZkxaEC1xjY https://youtu.be/qZkxaEC1xjY
      - yorwba 5y ago
        You really must be quite westernized if you can't talk about China anymore without using the US as a reference point, and have to rely on Westerners spreading lies about China in service of their own agenda to speak for you.

chloerei 5y ago

Skechers is a good example. They conducted multiple inspections and found no forced labor, so they maintained business dealings with Chinese suppliers. https://about.skechers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/SKECHERS-USA-STATEMENT-UYGHURS-March-2021.pdf https://about.skechers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/SKECHE...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

splitstud 5y ago

Why would I ever import from a supplier whose only positive is price, if I have to go to extra effort and expense - making them no longer competitive in any respect?