4 ms·
Children working in coltan mines and on cocoa plantations are part of the same issue, so I don't understand why you take issue with that issue being brought to
by Xelynega 4y ago
Children working in coltan mines and on cocoa plantations are part of the same issue, so I don't understand why you take issue with that issue being brought to the forefront using 'some cool tech bandwagon'. It's a cool tech bandwagon because people's eyes are on it, if you agree these issues are issues wouldn't you want them seen by those eyes?
I don't quite understand your final point. Yes, changing the labour relations globally would require global changes.
> Who's gonna pay to make that happen?
It's a misunderstanding to frame it like this, because the answer is that the exploited people are already paying for the current reality with their labour. Why is it assumed that they can continue to shoulder the majority of the work for the minority of the benefits, but the idea that the work and benefits should be spread more evenly is abhorrent?
- scotty79 4y ago> I don't understand why you take issue with that issue being brought to the forefront using 'some cool tech bandwagon'. It just feels cheap and even less effective than other approaches. It promotes a whack-a-mole mindset. > It's a misunderstanding to frame it like this, because the answer is that the exploited people are already paying for the current reality with their labour. Ah, I see your misunderstanding. I didn't mean that somebody will bear the cost of a change. I meant that for any change to happen somebody must pay out of their ears for political influence to force that change. The only maeningful laws that come into power are laws that somebody bought. Who's gonna buy 'non-exploitation' law if everybody with any money (billionaires, but also you and me) benefits from this exploitation? Want to solve the problem? Figure a way how someone can earn big money on preventing exploitation of people.