4 ms·

What is interesting is that everyone who opposes globalization for what it does in terms of labor market conveniently forgets that localizing also comes with a

What is interesting is that everyone who opposes globalization for what it does in terms of labor market conveniently forgets that localizing also comes with a lot of darker things. We want to manufacture iPhones on US soil entirely? Well, where are those factories going to be? What children will live in dangerous health conditions in perpetuity because of the pollution that will come with it? Where will all the waste go?

gonzo41 3y ago
This is a really funny comment. It's like you're saying those things are fine if they happen to Chinese kids. How grim
- cies 3y ago
  I was shocked for the same reasons. Did the author of the comment not see it's so blatantly racist?
  - darth_avocado 3y ago
    It’s barely racist. It’s just the double Standards everyone has. Every single one of us can pretend that we care about children mining Cobalt in Africa, but really, no one is willing to give up their iPhones or demand accountability. However if a factory was to be set up in our own backyards, every single one of us would be up in arms. The comment wasn’t to say it is okay, it was to highlight that to enjoy a certain level of comfort in the modern world, we need to do some pretty bad things. And most people don’t even realize what they are until it hits their backyard. Also, let me frame it this way, given that you’re not okay with pollution sufferings of people in China, would you be okay if the same factory was set up next to your house, given that even the most factories operating under safe standards still emit enough pollution to have long term effects on humans? Virtue signaling on the internet is easy, real world is hard.
    - cies 3y ago
      > we need to do some pretty bad things I disagree. We can do without, but some "have not yet". And big biz is really good in exploiting that. I simply refuse to go with the fatalistic "we need to". Hang on for a thought experiment... Say we only tax "bad behavior" defined as: polluting, resource usage (land, water, etc.), resource hoarding (excessive wealth), products/services that are deemed unhealthy/immoral. And we do not tax good behavior: income from labor, having a house, buying healthy food, etc. If we do this fair and square (for persons and businesses alike) the market will find solutions. Currently the market's optimized towards bad behavior, and we are starting to see the results of that.
- darth_avocado 3y ago
  No they are not, but also most of the world is okay consuming the fruits of their labor. Let me frame it this way, given that you’re not okay with pollution sufferings of people in China, would you be okay if the same factory was set up next to your house, given that even the most factories operating under safe standards still emit enough pollution to have long term effects on humans?
arbitrary_name 3y ago
There doesn't need to be any children or pollution involved. It does mean that the iPhone might be double the price, but that to me is the whole point of deglobalization: prevent capital from running around our labor and environment laws, and establish an equal global playing field.
kimmk 3y ago
One could argue it more moral to deal with those externalities within the wealthy nations than offloading them to poorer, less well-regulated economies. Western nations pride themselves with achievements in environmental, labour and other industry regulations. Extending them further down the supply chain would maximize their positive effects.
- user_named 3y ago
  One could argue that it isn't.
rgbgraph 3y ago
Perhaps when it’s on our own soil we might actually give a shit that they’re using child slaves and destroying the environment? When an American goes abroad to abuse children we round up a storm about the despicability of one person — and then throw them in prison. When a global corporation does it, we roil in the injustice with various huffing and puffing, and then go on with our lives. Sent from my iPhone (TM)
- darth_avocado 3y ago
  The train derailment and the amount of people that didn’t care shows you that the apathy of a consumer doesn’t change unless it’s their own backyard

gonzo41 3y ago

This is a really funny comment. It's like you're saying those things are fine if they happen to Chinese kids. How grim

cies 3y ago
I was shocked for the same reasons. Did the author of the comment not see it's so blatantly racist?
- darth_avocado 3y ago
  It’s barely racist. It’s just the double Standards everyone has. Every single one of us can pretend that we care about children mining Cobalt in Africa, but really, no one is willing to give up their iPhones or demand accountability. However if a factory was to be set up in our own backyards, every single one of us would be up in arms. The comment wasn’t to say it is okay, it was to highlight that to enjoy a certain level of comfort in the modern world, we need to do some pretty bad things. And most people don’t even realize what they are until it hits their backyard. Also, let me frame it this way, given that you’re not okay with pollution sufferings of people in China, would you be okay if the same factory was set up next to your house, given that even the most factories operating under safe standards still emit enough pollution to have long term effects on humans? Virtue signaling on the internet is easy, real world is hard.
  - cies 3y ago
    > we need to do some pretty bad things I disagree. We can do without, but some "have not yet". And big biz is really good in exploiting that. I simply refuse to go with the fatalistic "we need to". Hang on for a thought experiment... Say we only tax "bad behavior" defined as: polluting, resource usage (land, water, etc.), resource hoarding (excessive wealth), products/services that are deemed unhealthy/immoral. And we do not tax good behavior: income from labor, having a house, buying healthy food, etc. If we do this fair and square (for persons and businesses alike) the market will find solutions. Currently the market's optimized towards bad behavior, and we are starting to see the results of that.
darth_avocado 3y ago
No they are not, but also most of the world is okay consuming the fruits of their labor. Let me frame it this way, given that you’re not okay with pollution sufferings of people in China, would you be okay if the same factory was set up next to your house, given that even the most factories operating under safe standards still emit enough pollution to have long term effects on humans?

arbitrary_name 3y ago

There doesn't need to be any children or pollution involved. It does mean that the iPhone might be double the price, but that to me is the whole point of deglobalization: prevent capital from running around our labor and environment laws, and establish an equal global playing field.

kimmk 3y ago

One could argue it more moral to deal with those externalities within the wealthy nations than offloading them to poorer, less well-regulated economies. Western nations pride themselves with achievements in environmental, labour and other industry regulations. Extending them further down the supply chain would maximize their positive effects.

user_named 3y ago
One could argue that it isn't.

rgbgraph 3y ago

Perhaps when it’s on our own soil we might actually give a shit that they’re using child slaves and destroying the environment? When an American goes abroad to abuse children we round up a storm about the despicability of one person — and then throw them in prison. When a global corporation does it, we roil in the injustice with various huffing and puffing, and then go on with our lives. Sent from my iPhone (TM)

darth_avocado 3y ago
The train derailment and the amount of people that didn’t care shows you that the apathy of a consumer doesn’t change unless it’s their own backyard