4 ms·

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

by 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.
wdewind 12y ago
> 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 First of all, I don't think there's anyway you can assert that. We have no real data about what depression rates were like when these jobs were introduced. Second of all, the notion that all of these people could be simple, back to the earth farmers is the alternative is all kinds of incorrect. Third, the notion that even if they were back to the earth farmers they would be happier than factory workers is also one that, from what I've seen, is based entirely on sentiment and not on evidence.

by brd 12y ago

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.

wdewind 12y ago

> 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 First of all, I don't think there's anyway you can assert that. We have no real data about what depression rates were like when these jobs were introduced. Second of all, the notion that all of these people could be simple, back to the earth farmers is the alternative is all kinds of incorrect. Third, the notion that even if they were back to the earth farmers they would be happier than factory workers is also one that, from what I've seen, is based entirely on sentiment and not on evidence.