3 ms·

It's funny that that anti-globalists like to frame it as them caring about the "poor sweatshop workers" without considering the sentiments of those workers. The

by Aunche 4y ago

It's funny that that anti-globalists like to frame it as them caring about the "poor sweatshop workers" without considering the sentiments of those workers. They think that taking away the little economic choice that these people have would be a great boon for them. Globalization isn't just good for developing nations, it benefits developed ones as well. American's dominance in technology, finance, and entertainment would not be possible to sustain without it.

leereeves 4y ago
> American's dominance in technology, finance, and entertainment would not be possible to sustain without it. Yes, without it, other nations could develop competitive industries at the top of the food chain and their citizens would have options other than working in sweatshops. Globalization comes packaged with many demands that primarily benefit Western corporations and make it very difficult to rise above subservience. (China rose largely because they ignored these demands, violated Western intellectual property laws, restricted the transfer of money in and out of the country, heavily regulated foreign companies, and had enough strength not to be sanctioned, invaded, or overthrown for doing so.)
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  Ok thats just wrong. Many asian countries developed their own competitive industries because the west outsourced some labor there. India/China both followed the same path Also, have you considered the opinion of the "sweatshop" workers because for them the options are "sweatshop" or not working at all
  - leereeves 4y ago
    Citing China as an example of the success of globalism and free trade is an interesting choice. They have a protectionist economy, and it was the most successful economy over the last forty years. China seems to have proven the benefits of protectionism. And I'm arguing that sweatshop workers would have options other than "'sweatshop' or not working at all" if free trade weren't killing any opportunity they might have to develop local industries. Their situation is not entirely unlike a small town in America when a WalMart opens, kills the local businesses, and the only remaining jobs are at WalMart.
  - Ekaros 4y ago
    Subsistence farming is what lot of these workers come from. The factories or even sweatshops might not be perfect, but with increased population they are preferable to working fields with all the risks that involve.
  - wardedVibe 4y ago
    More accurately, the alternative is continuing to practice subsistence farming, which is not a great alternative.
- Aunche 4y ago
  Is Asia just a made up continent? How do you expect the child of an uneducated subsidence farmer to become a programmer when they live in a poor country, and you're blocking means of external investment? What people don't seem to realize is that it's impossible to transition a place with incredibly shitty living conditions to good living conditions, without reaching a midpoint of moderately shitty living conditions.
  - mantas 4y ago
    Old laptops are cheap. And piracy is non-issue. Learning to program is not rocket science. And that is pretty easy to learn too nowadays, just a bit harder to practice. Many of the subsistence farmers have a crapton of knowledge about their environment and how to make stuff grow. Many of them are pretty good at basic redneck engineering too. That's a pretty good background to get hold of basic programming which is not that far off.
    - hurflmurfl 4y ago
      When I got my first laptop I didn't magically learn programming. That bit took me several years of learning, trying, forgetting, getting confused, re-learning... All of that would have not been possible if not for my parents providing for me. If I absolutely had to work full days ( which incidentally isn't limited to 8 hours a week in all countries in all jobs) to make ends meet, my chance of finding my calling would have been pretty slim. In other words, just the learning tools are not enough, it's but one of the necessary resources, and for some people spare time or strength can be very difficult to find.
      - mantas 4y ago
        Personally I learned programming in the evenings after school when I was 12-15. Sure that counts as „parents providing for me“ and my parents weren't farmers. But even in farming it's not like you work 24/7. And when air is crap or it's a slow season in between crops etc there's plenty of time off. And many farmers (labour, whatever) do know how important it is to give kids time to study things. TBH for me parents who drive kids around to all sorts of extra-curriculum activities for me seem to be much worse than free-range parents who just ensure that kids have time to pursue things they like. Just with some navigation to ensure they don't spend all the time partying. Which is also important though.
mantas 4y ago
As a citizen of „2nd world“ country that had (and still has to some extent) it's share of being a sweatshop... I'd rather say globalization is good for developing nations and the rich of the developed. It brings the middle class and labour of the world close together. Dragging down developed world a bit and enriching developing world a ton. Now is the most interesting phase when developing world has developed somewhat, local elites grew up and now they'll start challenging „developed“ world elite. It will be most interesting to watch developed world non-elites. Developing world is very happy with improvements and have the momentum. Meanwhile developed world is slowing down and it will be damn hard to turn the tide.

by Aunche 4y ago

leereeves 4y ago

> American's dominance in technology, finance, and entertainment would not be possible to sustain without it. Yes, without it, other nations could develop competitive industries at the top of the food chain and their citizens would have options other than working in sweatshops. Globalization comes packaged with many demands that primarily benefit Western corporations and make it very difficult to rise above subservience. (China rose largely because they ignored these demands, violated Western intellectual property laws, restricted the transfer of money in and out of the country, heavily regulated foreign companies, and had enough strength not to be sanctioned, invaded, or overthrown for doing so.)

cuteboy19 4y ago
Ok thats just wrong. Many asian countries developed their own competitive industries because the west outsourced some labor there. India/China both followed the same path Also, have you considered the opinion of the "sweatshop" workers because for them the options are "sweatshop" or not working at all
- leereeves 4y ago
  Citing China as an example of the success of globalism and free trade is an interesting choice. They have a protectionist economy, and it was the most successful economy over the last forty years. China seems to have proven the benefits of protectionism. And I'm arguing that sweatshop workers would have options other than "'sweatshop' or not working at all" if free trade weren't killing any opportunity they might have to develop local industries. Their situation is not entirely unlike a small town in America when a WalMart opens, kills the local businesses, and the only remaining jobs are at WalMart.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Subsistence farming is what lot of these workers come from. The factories or even sweatshops might not be perfect, but with increased population they are preferable to working fields with all the risks that involve.
- wardedVibe 4y ago
  More accurately, the alternative is continuing to practice subsistence farming, which is not a great alternative.
Aunche 4y ago
Is Asia just a made up continent? How do you expect the child of an uneducated subsidence farmer to become a programmer when they live in a poor country, and you're blocking means of external investment? What people don't seem to realize is that it's impossible to transition a place with incredibly shitty living conditions to good living conditions, without reaching a midpoint of moderately shitty living conditions.
- mantas 4y ago
  Old laptops are cheap. And piracy is non-issue. Learning to program is not rocket science. And that is pretty easy to learn too nowadays, just a bit harder to practice. Many of the subsistence farmers have a crapton of knowledge about their environment and how to make stuff grow. Many of them are pretty good at basic redneck engineering too. That's a pretty good background to get hold of basic programming which is not that far off.
  - hurflmurfl 4y ago
    When I got my first laptop I didn't magically learn programming. That bit took me several years of learning, trying, forgetting, getting confused, re-learning... All of that would have not been possible if not for my parents providing for me. If I absolutely had to work full days ( which incidentally isn't limited to 8 hours a week in all countries in all jobs) to make ends meet, my chance of finding my calling would have been pretty slim. In other words, just the learning tools are not enough, it's but one of the necessary resources, and for some people spare time or strength can be very difficult to find.
    - mantas 4y ago
      Personally I learned programming in the evenings after school when I was 12-15. Sure that counts as „parents providing for me“ and my parents weren't farmers. But even in farming it's not like you work 24/7. And when air is crap or it's a slow season in between crops etc there's plenty of time off. And many farmers (labour, whatever) do know how important it is to give kids time to study things. TBH for me parents who drive kids around to all sorts of extra-curriculum activities for me seem to be much worse than free-range parents who just ensure that kids have time to pursue things they like. Just with some navigation to ensure they don't spend all the time partying. Which is also important though.

mantas 4y ago

As a citizen of „2nd world“ country that had (and still has to some extent) it's share of being a sweatshop... I'd rather say globalization is good for developing nations and the rich of the developed. It brings the middle class and labour of the world close together. Dragging down developed world a bit and enriching developing world a ton. Now is the most interesting phase when developing world has developed somewhat, local elites grew up and now they'll start challenging „developed“ world elite. It will be most interesting to watch developed world non-elites. Developing world is very happy with improvements and have the momentum. Meanwhile developed world is slowing down and it will be damn hard to turn the tide.