3 ms·

This is one of those moments where I'm utterly distressed by the lack of a solution to curb all the frivolous consumerism of the world. It's scary to consider

by brd 12y ago

This is one of those moments where I'm utterly distressed by the lack of a solution to curb all the frivolous consumerism of the world. It's scary to consider how many others are just like Xu and how many more, us included, are only slightly better off.

dalanmiller 12y ago
This is really where I'm at a loss as of what to do, will the intersection of all human worldly values and ethics ever include sustainably living and shaming or preventing others who don't?
e40 12y ago
This is one of those moments where I'm utterly distressed by the lack of a solution to curb all the frivolous consumerism of the world. I don't think frivolous consumerism is the cause, it's what humans will do to others to get ahead. In other words, greed. The people that run the factories don't view the people as human, otherwise they wouldn't be able to treat them like machines.
- brd 12y ago
  I'm inclined to believe that Foxconn and its ilk exist because there is an insatiable need for the latest and greatest gadgets. I absolutely agree that greed will always be a major factor in the equation but I can't help but think that our rabid consumerism is the culprit providing the opportunity for the greedy to reign.
  - e40 12y ago
    Let's turn this around. Let's look at coal miners and the problems they've gone through. I don't think the consumers of coal would be considered frivolous or the cause of the bad conditions of the miners. It's the companies that want to squeeze out that last drop of profit at the expense of their workers. That's the problem. Humans can abuse other humans for any reason, and greed is the cause.
- sroerick 12y ago
  Do the people who consume the goods perceive the workers as human?
  - jmathai 12y ago
    The more separated someone is from a situation the less they relate. People buying smartphones are removed enough from the working conditions at Foxconn that it's of little significance. It applies in almost every corner of the world. If Ebola didn't start in a struggling, impoverished and black country there would be a lot more attention being paid to it as a crisis.
mrottenkolber 12y ago
Ironically this is the perfect place to rub it into. How many HNers have the latest iPhone or some current gen Android phone?
svachalek 12y ago
What if we didn't buy electronics, or what if we insisted on treating these workers so well it made more sense to leave the factories in the US? Then our money stays here and young men and women like Xu are back in their villages trying to scrape out a living on a few square meters of soil. Workers take these jobs because it's an opportunity to improve their life and the lives of their families. It may still be miserable compared to what it "should" or "could" be but the fact is it's better than the alternative. We should definitely do what we can as consumers to pressure the companies and governments in our supply chain to improve the quality of life for their laborers. I'm just saying that the alternative world where these guys are all living out peaceful, prosperous lives just "because" is not one that has ever existed either.
- brd 12y ago
  This argument always comes up and its an argument I hate. If for no other reason, I dislike it because from what I've seen rates of depression are dramatically higher when you introduce these sorts of jobs vs. letting people scrape by working land in a 3rd world setting. What you're arguing is (excuse the hyperbolic nature of the example) that slavery is better than leaving indigenous people in their natural setting. Your argument makes sense from an economic perspective but I don't believe it holds water when you account for quality of life.
  - sliverstorm 12y ago
    That's assuming the workers could afford food before. I seem to recall that when eastern child labor shops were shut down at the behest of Westerners, we found that child labor dropped- and starvation and kids in the sex trade both increased. It's wrong to assume indigenous people need saving, but IMO it's also wrong to assume their lives were great before.
  - svachalek 12y ago
    FWIW, I've been to Shenzhen and actually ended up in a hotel across the street from the big Foxconn campus where I assume Xu worked. At shift change time an unbelievable army comes rolling out; I believe it's over 100,000 workers per shift although most live on-campus. But they looked pretty much like any group of blue collar workers I've ever seen getting off work. They were talking, smiling, laughing, eating snacks. 15 years ago I saw some of rural China. I saw a lot of dirty, leathery, gap-toothed people, and it seemed most couldn't afford shoes. The population density was incredible, with entire families working plots of land that weren't any bigger than suburban yards. These days, to be fair, it's gotten quite a bit better in the countryside as the Chinese economy has boomed, food prices have risen, and many people have moved to the city. People look healthier, wear shoes, have plumbing. But for the sake of comparing the "indigenous" life I don't think it's fair to look at the post-industrialized state. I guess in short I'm saying it's not fair to over-dramatize the difference and think about shackled slaves vs. native warriors riding around grassy plains. I think ultimately it's only fair to ask the people themselves and I think you will find that the average Chinese worker is far happier with the direction their life and country are moving in than the average American.

by brd 12y ago

dalanmiller 12y ago

This is really where I'm at a loss as of what to do, will the intersection of all human worldly values and ethics ever include sustainably living and shaming or preventing others who don't?

e40 12y ago

This is one of those moments where I'm utterly distressed by the lack of a solution to curb all the frivolous consumerism of the world. I don't think frivolous consumerism is the cause, it's what humans will do to others to get ahead. In other words, greed. The people that run the factories don't view the people as human, otherwise they wouldn't be able to treat them like machines.

brd 12y ago
I'm inclined to believe that Foxconn and its ilk exist because there is an insatiable need for the latest and greatest gadgets. I absolutely agree that greed will always be a major factor in the equation but I can't help but think that our rabid consumerism is the culprit providing the opportunity for the greedy to reign.
- e40 12y ago
  Let's turn this around. Let's look at coal miners and the problems they've gone through. I don't think the consumers of coal would be considered frivolous or the cause of the bad conditions of the miners. It's the companies that want to squeeze out that last drop of profit at the expense of their workers. That's the problem. Humans can abuse other humans for any reason, and greed is the cause.
sroerick 12y ago
Do the people who consume the goods perceive the workers as human?
- jmathai 12y ago
  The more separated someone is from a situation the less they relate. People buying smartphones are removed enough from the working conditions at Foxconn that it's of little significance. It applies in almost every corner of the world. If Ebola didn't start in a struggling, impoverished and black country there would be a lot more attention being paid to it as a crisis.

mrottenkolber 12y ago

Ironically this is the perfect place to rub it into. How many HNers have the latest iPhone or some current gen Android phone?

svachalek 12y ago

What if we didn't buy electronics, or what if we insisted on treating these workers so well it made more sense to leave the factories in the US? Then our money stays here and young men and women like Xu are back in their villages trying to scrape out a living on a few square meters of soil. Workers take these jobs because it's an opportunity to improve their life and the lives of their families. It may still be miserable compared to what it "should" or "could" be but the fact is it's better than the alternative. We should definitely do what we can as consumers to pressure the companies and governments in our supply chain to improve the quality of life for their laborers. I'm just saying that the alternative world where these guys are all living out peaceful, prosperous lives just "because" is not one that has ever existed either.

brd 12y ago
This argument always comes up and its an argument I hate. If for no other reason, I dislike it because from what I've seen rates of depression are dramatically higher when you introduce these sorts of jobs vs. letting people scrape by working land in a 3rd world setting. What you're arguing is (excuse the hyperbolic nature of the example) that slavery is better than leaving indigenous people in their natural setting. Your argument makes sense from an economic perspective but I don't believe it holds water when you account for quality of life.
- sliverstorm 12y ago
  That's assuming the workers could afford food before. I seem to recall that when eastern child labor shops were shut down at the behest of Westerners, we found that child labor dropped- and starvation and kids in the sex trade both increased. It's wrong to assume indigenous people need saving, but IMO it's also wrong to assume their lives were great before.
- svachalek 12y ago
  FWIW, I've been to Shenzhen and actually ended up in a hotel across the street from the big Foxconn campus where I assume Xu worked. At shift change time an unbelievable army comes rolling out; I believe it's over 100,000 workers per shift although most live on-campus. But they looked pretty much like any group of blue collar workers I've ever seen getting off work. They were talking, smiling, laughing, eating snacks. 15 years ago I saw some of rural China. I saw a lot of dirty, leathery, gap-toothed people, and it seemed most couldn't afford shoes. The population density was incredible, with entire families working plots of land that weren't any bigger than suburban yards. These days, to be fair, it's gotten quite a bit better in the countryside as the Chinese economy has boomed, food prices have risen, and many people have moved to the city. People look healthier, wear shoes, have plumbing. But for the sake of comparing the "indigenous" life I don't think it's fair to look at the post-industrialized state. I guess in short I'm saying it's not fair to over-dramatize the difference and think about shackled slaves vs. native warriors riding around grassy plains. I think ultimately it's only fair to ask the people themselves and I think you will find that the average Chinese worker is far happier with the direction their life and country are moving in than the average American.