4 ms·

I don't understand why people think that using inexpensive labor overseas is "exploitation". If they are willing to take the job, that means it's paying more t

I don't understand why people think that using inexpensive labor overseas is "exploitation". If they are willing to take the job, that means it's paying more than the other options they have available to them which includes not having a job at all. As long as they aren't being held at gunpoint and aren't actual slaves, how is this exploitation if they are happy to freely take the job?

throwawaymsft 13y ago
There's a spectrum between slavery and a happy, voluntary decision. Most of us want the floor on how an employer treats its workers slightly above gunpoint.
- Casseres 13y ago
  I'd rather the floor be much higher than just slightly above gunpoint. Like you mentioned, there are some people who don't care, and that's sad. Chances are that a voluntarily-working group of people have the floor much higher than "slightly above gunpoint". Also, you appear to be logged into a 4-day-old throwaway account. Is that intentional?
  - coldtea 13y ago
    Hunger is not very different from "gunpoint". You are working "voluntary" only if you have options.
    - exit 13y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
    - qq66 13y ago
      Because humans cannot photosynthesize, hunger is a consequence of idleness in a subsistence farming economy. A modern industrialized economy isn't too different along that parameter.
      - pbhjpbhj 13y ago
        >hunger is a consequence of idleness in a subsistence farming economy // Yeah, 'cause famines and floods and other natural disasters never happen. No-one ever has to sell all their produce to pay for medicine. No, nothing like that; hunger==idleness for sure. /sarc
        qq66 13y ago
        I didn't say that idleness is the only cause of hunger.
  - throwawaymsft 13y ago
    Whoops, yep my login was from before. Maybe I'll stick with it a bit. I was being facetious with the "slightly above" phrase :-). But I probably didn't word it well.
- gambiting 13y ago
  I come from Poland,where the minimum wage is ~$1.8 and I know a lot of people who earn it. Now from what I've heard, the Chinese workers at Foxconn work for $15 a day, and everyone calls it exploitation. Yet the Polish workers work for not much more if not for less after paying their taxes, and I've never heard anyone in the Western countries calling Polish workers "exploited". I also don't know anyone working under "slightly above gunpoint" conditions. The wages are just what they are, for many many different reasons. But just because someone is not getting paid what a person doing the same job in the UK or US or Germany would get paid doesn't automatically mean that they are exploited.
  - aestra 13y ago
    If Foxconn could do better economically in Poland, you bet your ass they would be in Poland. Wage is just one thing to take into consideration. Working conditions, forced overtime (perhaps without pay), safety, etc...
coldtea 13y ago
It's the taking advantage of their lack of options (and need to feed themselves) to pay them less that's the exploitation. Exploitation is far more nuanced than "working at gunpoint". But it all has to do with ethical standards. Some are content to get the cheap labor, so they see no problem here.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- chrischen 13y ago
  I'm Chinese and so is my co-founder. In fact, she grew up in China, and I lived a part of my life in semi-rural China. I know and interacted with people who worked in factories and have relatives that do these jobs. We kind of take offense to the idea that us bringing extra work to these painters in China is "exploitation," and it's easy for a lot of comfortable Westerners to take this stance because the standard of living here is so high and we have the luxury to think about how much we'd all like to get paid. To put your mind at ease, most of these painters have set up shop doing this regularly, and have a standardized price usually on their websites. We simply contact them, talk to them, and send them business according to their quoted prices. We don't gather a bunch of people who have nothing else to do and force them to paint because they have no other alternatives. They are already painters, and they do this as as their main specialty.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >We kind of take offense to the idea that us bringing extra work to these painters in China is "exploitation," and it's easy for a lot of comfortable Westerners to take this stance because the standard of living here is so high and we have the luxury to think about how much we'd all like to get paid. Well, I'm not that much of a "confortable Westerner". I'm from Europe, true, but my country has been in a dire Euro-crisis condition for years. Since that happened we see all kinds of foreign and local businesses coming to exploit the situation, offering wages that we consider insulting and near-substinence but are forced to accept for lack of options. The only reason business say the "cost of living" in country X matters regarding to how much to pay a worker is because they can get away with it. I don't see why an American working at X is worth more than a Chinese or a Portuguese working at X. Especially with all the talk of a globalised economy. It seems the main idea businesses take from a globalized economy is to take advantage of it NOT being globalised enough, ie. to play national economies and cheaper labour against each other. I'd like to see a real "global economy", where everyone is paid the same.
wyager 13y ago
Because clearly everyone deserves to live at whatever arbitrary standards the person complaining about "exploitation" thinks is correct. Nevermind the fact that if they weren't being "exploited" like this, they'd probably be illiterate subsistence farmers.
- dgabriel 13y ago
  Come on, these are trained artists, not "illiterate dirt farmers." There's a way to have the globalization discussion respectfully, but this is not it.
  - chrischen 13y ago
    What he's saying is that if these artists didn't have a supply of income, they would not have studied art. Withholding jobs from China because they are "too low" by Western standards simply further lowers their wages (due to artificial constriction of demand), hurts economic development, and discourages development of human capital (like artists) because foreign companies think it's too cheap to pay them.
tommoor 13y ago
It isn't necessarily, but obviously it does exist. My point was not that instapainting is doing this, but if they are not that it might be nice to make it transparent how they are also bettering the lives of the painters :)

throwawaymsft 13y ago

There's a spectrum between slavery and a happy, voluntary decision. Most of us want the floor on how an employer treats its workers slightly above gunpoint.

Casseres 13y ago
I'd rather the floor be much higher than just slightly above gunpoint. Like you mentioned, there are some people who don't care, and that's sad. Chances are that a voluntarily-working group of people have the floor much higher than "slightly above gunpoint". Also, you appear to be logged into a 4-day-old throwaway account. Is that intentional?
- coldtea 13y ago
  Hunger is not very different from "gunpoint". You are working "voluntary" only if you have options.
  - exit 13y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
  - qq66 13y ago
    Because humans cannot photosynthesize, hunger is a consequence of idleness in a subsistence farming economy. A modern industrialized economy isn't too different along that parameter.
    - pbhjpbhj 13y ago
      >hunger is a consequence of idleness in a subsistence farming economy // Yeah, 'cause famines and floods and other natural disasters never happen. No-one ever has to sell all their produce to pay for medicine. No, nothing like that; hunger==idleness for sure. /sarc
      - qq66 13y ago
        I didn't say that idleness is the only cause of hunger.
- throwawaymsft 13y ago
  Whoops, yep my login was from before. Maybe I'll stick with it a bit. I was being facetious with the "slightly above" phrase :-). But I probably didn't word it well.
gambiting 13y ago
I come from Poland,where the minimum wage is ~$1.8 and I know a lot of people who earn it. Now from what I've heard, the Chinese workers at Foxconn work for $15 a day, and everyone calls it exploitation. Yet the Polish workers work for not much more if not for less after paying their taxes, and I've never heard anyone in the Western countries calling Polish workers "exploited". I also don't know anyone working under "slightly above gunpoint" conditions. The wages are just what they are, for many many different reasons. But just because someone is not getting paid what a person doing the same job in the UK or US or Germany would get paid doesn't automatically mean that they are exploited.
- aestra 13y ago
  If Foxconn could do better economically in Poland, you bet your ass they would be in Poland. Wage is just one thing to take into consideration. Working conditions, forced overtime (perhaps without pay), safety, etc...

coldtea 13y ago

It's the taking advantage of their lack of options (and need to feed themselves) to pay them less that's the exploitation. Exploitation is far more nuanced than "working at gunpoint". But it all has to do with ethical standards. Some are content to get the cheap labor, so they see no problem here.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
chrischen 13y ago
I'm Chinese and so is my co-founder. In fact, she grew up in China, and I lived a part of my life in semi-rural China. I know and interacted with people who worked in factories and have relatives that do these jobs. We kind of take offense to the idea that us bringing extra work to these painters in China is "exploitation," and it's easy for a lot of comfortable Westerners to take this stance because the standard of living here is so high and we have the luxury to think about how much we'd all like to get paid. To put your mind at ease, most of these painters have set up shop doing this regularly, and have a standardized price usually on their websites. We simply contact them, talk to them, and send them business according to their quoted prices. We don't gather a bunch of people who have nothing else to do and force them to paint because they have no other alternatives. They are already painters, and they do this as as their main specialty.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >We kind of take offense to the idea that us bringing extra work to these painters in China is "exploitation," and it's easy for a lot of comfortable Westerners to take this stance because the standard of living here is so high and we have the luxury to think about how much we'd all like to get paid. Well, I'm not that much of a "confortable Westerner". I'm from Europe, true, but my country has been in a dire Euro-crisis condition for years. Since that happened we see all kinds of foreign and local businesses coming to exploit the situation, offering wages that we consider insulting and near-substinence but are forced to accept for lack of options. The only reason business say the "cost of living" in country X matters regarding to how much to pay a worker is because they can get away with it. I don't see why an American working at X is worth more than a Chinese or a Portuguese working at X. Especially with all the talk of a globalised economy. It seems the main idea businesses take from a globalized economy is to take advantage of it NOT being globalised enough, ie. to play national economies and cheaper labour against each other. I'd like to see a real "global economy", where everyone is paid the same.

wyager 13y ago

Because clearly everyone deserves to live at whatever arbitrary standards the person complaining about "exploitation" thinks is correct. Nevermind the fact that if they weren't being "exploited" like this, they'd probably be illiterate subsistence farmers.

dgabriel 13y ago
Come on, these are trained artists, not "illiterate dirt farmers." There's a way to have the globalization discussion respectfully, but this is not it.
- chrischen 13y ago
  What he's saying is that if these artists didn't have a supply of income, they would not have studied art. Withholding jobs from China because they are "too low" by Western standards simply further lowers their wages (due to artificial constriction of demand), hurts economic development, and discourages development of human capital (like artists) because foreign companies think it's too cheap to pay them.

tommoor 13y ago

It isn't necessarily, but obviously it does exist. My point was not that instapainting is doing this, but if they are not that it might be nice to make it transparent how they are also bettering the lives of the painters :)