4 ms·

I think the point on outsourcing is hinted at I the other story trending highly today about the man living without money. If you had to look a 9 year old child

by ljf 13y ago

I think the point on outsourcing is hinted at I the other story trending highly today about the man living without money. If you had to look a 9 year old child labourer in the eye each time you were buying your cheaply made T-shirt, or a worker how has just completed a 14hour day making component for your phone, would you still feel as happy with your purchase. Yes not all outsourcing is negative and not all worker abused, but when you remove visibility of production from people you limit their ability to choose based not only on the quality of the product but also the morals of the producing company.

gnarbarian 13y ago
Perhaps the 9 year old child laborer would otherwise starve. I'll gladly buy the T-shirt every time. Or think of it like this. If all T-Shirts were required to be made in the US by union laborers working 30 hours per week and each one cost $50, I'd probably buy a heck of a lot less T shirts.
- ljf 13y ago
  True, but maybe we don't need what we are currently buying, but are because the costs are hidden. How much of the stuff we own do we really need?
  - gnarbarian 13y ago
    I don't understand why necessity even comes into this. We don't need a lot of things. We don't need freedom of speech. We don't need more than 2 pairs of underwear or a car either. I don't need more than 2500 calories but I like being able to go eat a big juicy $50 steak sometimes. In the US it's actually illegal to go faster than 65 mph (75 in some awesome places) so why should we make cars that go faster than that if you obviously don't need it. If you don't need the stuff you are currently buying there's nothing stopping you from living in a 4ft high hole in the dirt and eating cereal with water instead of milk and only buying locally produced goods. Forcing someone else to live up to your definition of necessity is a pretty shitty thing to do though IMO.
    - tdmule 13y ago
      It seems as though this tangent has quickly turned into a discussion about consumerism (and indirectly its relation to capitalism).
    - lotharbot 13y ago
      Tangent: parts of Utah and Texas have speed limits of 80-85 mph. Their speed limit laws are also prima facie, which means you can get out of a speeding ticket by proving your speed was "reasonable and prudent" even if it was in excess of the limit.
chad_oliver 13y ago
I would willingly look a 9 year old child laborer in the eye each time I buy a cheaply made T-shirt, and I would feel good about myself. Consider: most people in developing countries are able to choose which job they will do. It is true that some (far too many) are held in debt bondage, but the vast majority are not. Therefore, if the 9 year old child laborer is working to make cheap T-shirts, they're doing that because it's the best option available to them. If I refuse to purchase these T-shirts on principle, I'm denying them an income. I would much rather deny the income of first-world manufacturers who don't need my money.
- mrow84 13y ago
  Markets "decide" what is best by responding to price signals. If you buy a cheap T-shirt then you are saying to the market that you value low price over an ethical supply chain. Buyers from first world countries do not (in general) deal first-hand with the labourers, they deal with factory owners who have the capital equipment necessary to do the manufacturing at the required scale. All the while that there is price pressure from the market (from you), the buyers will be pushing that price pressure onto the factory owners. As long as there is one factory owner who is willing to take that low price then all factory owners who want the same (or similar) contracts have to take that price, otherwise they are out-competed in the free market. They, in turn, push that price pressure onto their workers, preventing increases in wages. The rest of what you said is correct: the workers take the jobs not because they want to work for such low wages, but because they are the best wages they can obtain given their skill levels. Buying cheap clothes almost directly contributes to the continuation of poverty. As an aside, you mentioned child labour. A not uncommon strand to discussions on these issues is that people should "act more responsibly" and "choose" to get educated when they are young rather than waste their time for the short-term benefits of working. People send their children to work because they can't bring in enough money themselves, for reasons like disability (there are a lot more workplace accidents in countries with poor labour protections!) or plain poverty. How does the hypothetical 9 year old improve their lot if the best thing they can do at the age of 9 is get a job manufacturing clothes?
  - chad_oliver 13y ago

by ljf 13y ago

gnarbarian 13y ago

Perhaps the 9 year old child laborer would otherwise starve. I'll gladly buy the T-shirt every time. Or think of it like this. If all T-Shirts were required to be made in the US by union laborers working 30 hours per week and each one cost $50, I'd probably buy a heck of a lot less T shirts.

ljf 13y ago
True, but maybe we don't need what we are currently buying, but are because the costs are hidden. How much of the stuff we own do we really need?
- gnarbarian 13y ago
  I don't understand why necessity even comes into this. We don't need a lot of things. We don't need freedom of speech. We don't need more than 2 pairs of underwear or a car either. I don't need more than 2500 calories but I like being able to go eat a big juicy $50 steak sometimes. In the US it's actually illegal to go faster than 65 mph (75 in some awesome places) so why should we make cars that go faster than that if you obviously don't need it. If you don't need the stuff you are currently buying there's nothing stopping you from living in a 4ft high hole in the dirt and eating cereal with water instead of milk and only buying locally produced goods. Forcing someone else to live up to your definition of necessity is a pretty shitty thing to do though IMO.
  - tdmule 13y ago
    It seems as though this tangent has quickly turned into a discussion about consumerism (and indirectly its relation to capitalism).
  - lotharbot 13y ago
    Tangent: parts of Utah and Texas have speed limits of 80-85 mph. Their speed limit laws are also prima facie, which means you can get out of a speeding ticket by proving your speed was "reasonable and prudent" even if it was in excess of the limit.

chad_oliver 13y ago

I would willingly look a 9 year old child laborer in the eye each time I buy a cheaply made T-shirt, and I would feel good about myself. Consider: most people in developing countries are able to choose which job they will do. It is true that some (far too many) are held in debt bondage, but the vast majority are not. Therefore, if the 9 year old child laborer is working to make cheap T-shirts, they're doing that because it's the best option available to them. If I refuse to purchase these T-shirts on principle, I'm denying them an income. I would much rather deny the income of first-world manufacturers who don't need my money.

mrow84 13y ago
Markets "decide" what is best by responding to price signals. If you buy a cheap T-shirt then you are saying to the market that you value low price over an ethical supply chain. Buyers from first world countries do not (in general) deal first-hand with the labourers, they deal with factory owners who have the capital equipment necessary to do the manufacturing at the required scale. All the while that there is price pressure from the market (from you), the buyers will be pushing that price pressure onto the factory owners. As long as there is one factory owner who is willing to take that low price then all factory owners who want the same (or similar) contracts have to take that price, otherwise they are out-competed in the free market. They, in turn, push that price pressure onto their workers, preventing increases in wages. The rest of what you said is correct: the workers take the jobs not because they want to work for such low wages, but because they are the best wages they can obtain given their skill levels. Buying cheap clothes almost directly contributes to the continuation of poverty. As an aside, you mentioned child labour. A not uncommon strand to discussions on these issues is that people should "act more responsibly" and "choose" to get educated when they are young rather than waste their time for the short-term benefits of working. People send their children to work because they can't bring in enough money themselves, for reasons like disability (there are a lot more workplace accidents in countries with poor labour protections!) or plain poverty. How does the hypothetical 9 year old improve their lot if the best thing they can do at the age of 9 is get a job manufacturing clothes?
- chad_oliver 13y ago