3 ms·

It's almost exactly a good thing though. >"It's cheaper to live there" yeah, I wonder why that might be. It's incoherent reply - if a job does not require hig

It's almost exactly a good thing though. >"It's cheaper to live there" yeah, I wonder why that might be. It's incoherent reply - if a job does not require high qualifications, besides language knowledge, going for cheapest place is the obvious thing. >The numerous unbelievably wealthy global companies all doing this in the same very specific areas surely have the area's best interests at heart, and want to raise its standard of living, so it must be something else. They are all paying more than local alternatives, thereby increasing local wages. > "No education required" because they don't have enough to fund education 3 dollars per hour is more than Polish minimum wage 10 years ago, and we funded education with much, much less. But I guess no foreign company should invest here? It would leave us in a way better place for sure. >And it also provides leverage for suppressing wages elsewhere, because companies can always just offshore work that their peons are demanding fair wages for. Once the same propaganda you're spewing was playing for Asia. It turned out globalization really made them comparatively rich. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/global-income-distribution.jpg https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/... Now it's time for Africa. The same argument is now even more incoherent - where's the cheaper place? >And, yes, it also brings a lot of outside wealth into those areas. At high human cost, but still. At the cost of... work.

Groxx 3y ago
Pretty much all this summarizes as "yes, it's valuable work to the individual". Broadly I agree - a lot of it is clearly a pretty big positive. But that doesn't make it not exploitative. For the same reasons that wealthy places don't generally allow child labor and have worker safety and environmental protections... but outsourced stuff frequently does not. The companies outsourcing are clearly aware of this, but most do or allow things that are blatantly illegal where they're headquartered. Not all of them! There are clear benefits to colocating labor (manufacturing in particular) and some legitimately seem to be spending the money and effort to make sure it's being done ethically. A strong majority very clearly does not though, and outsourced moderation seems to consistently fall into the uncaring category.
- KptMarchewa 3y ago
  > Pretty much all this summarizes as "yes, it's valuable work to the individual". Individuals are making up the societies. Few dozen of people working relatively high income, are lifting whole countries up - that's how globalization have worked. >But that doesn't make it not exploitative. For the same reasons that wealthy places don't generally allow child labor and have worker safety and environmental protections... but outsourced stuff frequently does not. The companies outsourcing are clearly aware of this, but most do or allow things that are blatantly illegal where they're headquartered. Now you're not actually accusing them of anything, but _comparing_ to other potential bad things. Those jobs aren't pleasant - as is working 12 hour shift in an ironworks - but they are damn better than subsistence farming and dying when there's draught one year. And after those bad jobs, come progressively better ones.
  - Groxx 3y ago
    No, I'm rather explicitly accusing them. >most do or allow things that are blatantly illegal where they're headquartered. Much of this would not be possible on a fair playing field. It happens because the companies outsourcing wield immensely disproportionate power, so they can get away with it. If "maybe we shouldn't let them kill people and dump the trash in their water supply" means slowing things down, I suspect it would be a net benefit, even after losing most of the positives it brings in. I recognize it's complex and opinions differ, of course. Not claiming I alone am right or that my opinion won't change.

Groxx 3y ago

Pretty much all this summarizes as "yes, it's valuable work to the individual". Broadly I agree - a lot of it is clearly a pretty big positive. But that doesn't make it not exploitative. For the same reasons that wealthy places don't generally allow child labor and have worker safety and environmental protections... but outsourced stuff frequently does not. The companies outsourcing are clearly aware of this, but most do or allow things that are blatantly illegal where they're headquartered. Not all of them! There are clear benefits to colocating labor (manufacturing in particular) and some legitimately seem to be spending the money and effort to make sure it's being done ethically. A strong majority very clearly does not though, and outsourced moderation seems to consistently fall into the uncaring category.

KptMarchewa 3y ago
> Pretty much all this summarizes as "yes, it's valuable work to the individual". Individuals are making up the societies. Few dozen of people working relatively high income, are lifting whole countries up - that's how globalization have worked. >But that doesn't make it not exploitative. For the same reasons that wealthy places don't generally allow child labor and have worker safety and environmental protections... but outsourced stuff frequently does not. The companies outsourcing are clearly aware of this, but most do or allow things that are blatantly illegal where they're headquartered. Now you're not actually accusing them of anything, but _comparing_ to other potential bad things. Those jobs aren't pleasant - as is working 12 hour shift in an ironworks - but they are damn better than subsistence farming and dying when there's draught one year. And after those bad jobs, come progressively better ones.
- Groxx 3y ago
  No, I'm rather explicitly accusing them. >most do or allow things that are blatantly illegal where they're headquartered. Much of this would not be possible on a fair playing field. It happens because the companies outsourcing wield immensely disproportionate power, so they can get away with it. If "maybe we shouldn't let them kill people and dump the trash in their water supply" means slowing things down, I suspect it would be a net benefit, even after losing most of the positives it brings in. I recognize it's complex and opinions differ, of course. Not claiming I alone am right or that my opinion won't change.