Good Piece on Sweatshops

[luckydevil]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/14/opinion/14KRIS.html

Inviting All Democrats

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Published: January 14, 2004

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — I'd like to invite Richard Gephardt and the other Democratic candidates to come here to Cambodia and discuss trade policy with scavengers like Nhep Chanda, who spends her days rooting through filth in the city dump.

One of the most unfortunate trends in the Democratic presidential race has been the way nearly all of the candidates, including Howard Dean, the front-runner, have been flirting with anti-trade positions by putting the emphasis on labor, environmental and human rights standards in international agreements.

While Mr. Gephardt calls for an international minimum wage, Mr. Dean was quoted in USA Today in October as saying, "I believe that trade also requires human rights and labor standards and environmental standards that are concurrent around the world."

Perhaps the candidates are simply pandering to unions, or bashing President Bush. But my guess is that they sincerely believe that such trade policies would help poor people abroad — and that's why they should all traipse through a Cambodian garbage dump to see how economically naïve these schemes would be.

Nhep Chanda is a 17-year-old girl who is one of hundreds of Cambodians who toil all day, every day, picking through the dump for plastic bags, metal cans and bits of food. The stench clogs the nostrils, and parts of the dump are burning, producing acrid smoke that blinds the eyes.

The scavengers are chased by swarms of flies and biting insects, their hands are caked with filth, and those who are barefoot cut their feet on glass. Some are small children.

Nhep Chanda averages 75 cents a day for her efforts. For her, the idea of being exploited in a garment factory — working only six days a week, inside instead of in the broiling sun, for up to $2 a day — is a dream.

"I'd like to work in a factory, but I don't have any ID card, and you need one to show that you're old enough," she said wistfully. (Since the candidates are unlikely to find the time to travel to the third world anytime soon, I put an audio slide show of the Cambodian realities on the Web for them at www.nytimes.com/kristof.)

All the complaints about third world sweatshops are true and then some: factories sometimes dump effluent into rivers or otherwise ravage the environment. But they have raised the standard of living in Singapore, South Korea and southern China, and they offer a leg up for people in countries like Cambodia.

"I want to work in a factory, but I'm in poor health and always feel dizzy," said Lay Eng, a 23-year-old woman. And no wonder: she has been picking through the filth, seven days a week, for six years. She has never been to a doctor.

Here in Cambodia factory jobs are in such demand that workers usually have to bribe a factory insider with a month's salary just to get hired.

Along the Bassac River, construction workers told me they wanted factory jobs because the work would be so much safer than clambering up scaffolding without safety harnesses. Some also said sweatshop jobs would be preferable because they would mean a lot less sweat. (Westerners call them "sweatshops," but they offer one of the few third world jobs that doesn't involve constant sweat.)

In Asia, moreover, the factories tend to hire mostly girls and young women with few other job opportunities. The result has been to begin to give girls and women some status and power, some hint of social equality, some alternative to the sex industry.

Cambodia has a fair trade system and promotes itself as an enlightened garment producer. That's great. But if the U.S. tries to ban products from countries that don't meet international standards, jobs will be shifted from the most wretched areas to better-off nations like Malaysia or Mexico. Already there are very few factories in Africa or the poor countries of Asia, and if we raise the bar higher, there will be even fewer.

The Democratic Party has been pro-trade since Franklin Roosevelt, and President Bill Clinton in particular tugged the party to embrace the realities of trade. Now the party may be retreating toward protectionism under the guise of labor standards.

That would hurt American consumers. But it would be particularly devastating for laborers in the poorest parts of the world. For the fundamental problem in the poor countries of Africa and Asia is not that sweatshops exploit too many workers; it's that they don't exploit enough.

------------------------------

You mean a international minimum wage would take away jobs, shocked I tell you. This coming from a liberal no less. Though he is dead wrong about FDR.

Damn evil corporations. Down with capitalism.

[Prosperity]

:rotflmao:

you just don't give up do you?

[Yomar]

Cambodia has a fair trade system and promotes itself as an enlightened garment producer. That's great. But if the U.S. tries to ban products from countries that don't meet international standards, jobs will be shifted from the most wretched areas to better-off nations like Malaysia or Mexico.

Either that or standards would have to improve in those countries, the tough part would be balancing the goal of raising working conditions while maintaining an economic incentive to the factory owners (usually run by an organized crime syndicate). For every Cambodian picking through garbage there is an Indian chained to a rug loom. I don't argue that many people would be worse off if they didn't work in a sweatshop, children especially, if only ethical dilemmas could be so easily answered by NY Times opinion pieces, what a nice world it would be.

Also, I'm not certain how "enlightened" seatshops in Malaysia or Mexico are, it would be nice if the writer backed up that assertion with a fact. That being said, the negative connotation of a sweatshop is indeed a Western idea that does not hold in poor countries.

[PCS]

this isn't a political statement/story I'm about to tell. some may call it insignificant. I'm not currently up on how the dollar compares to the 2 countries involved either. Jsut that it seems relevant to the article in some way. Either that or I need more coffee.

Building a single family hotel up in one of the higher end areas of the Park City area recently. Roughly 12 to 14,000 sq. feet on around 15 acres in the mountains. Ski in Ski out. The owner of the house is CEO of one of the bigger companys in the U.S. . At the time of the house's initial start, he was in the midst of planning the closing down of plants in both Maryland and England and the layoff of employees at those plants. Several thousands of jobs there . Fast forward about a year. House still under construction and he's walking through looking at things and talking with the superintendent of the job. Topic of the company somehow comes up. He mentions to the superintendent that he "was" paying roughly $16.50 an hour for his employees in Maryland. "Now" he was paying current employees in Mexico and China, ( I believe), $3.00 and $1.50 an hour respectively.

[webnarc]

Originally posted by Equality

:rotflmao:

you just don't give up do you?

It's his doctrine of persuasion, not force.

[luckydevil]

It's his doctrine of persuasion, not force.

Better than a doctrine that believes in imposing one's will/views/ideas on others.

webnarc

A question

Would it be right for a homeless man to rob you tonight to feed his children?

[Prosperity]

Why is it wrong to force people to do stuff, as long as laws are passed fairly? waite do you even believe that we should have laws, after all we shouldn't force people to do anything :laugh:

[webnarc]

.

[Ancalagon the Black]

Man, have I been misled! Here I was thinking that the best way--in fact the only way--to demonstrate the validity of ideas is to consider the concepts themselves, rather than to attack the person with an opposing viewpoint.

In the future, I shall only bring up someone's youth, question their motives, impugn their choices in life, and concentrate my invective on personal attacks. Indeed, I will direct my efforts not to the ideas, but to the man.

Hey, what's Latin for "to the man" again? Oh yeah: ad hominem.

[Darth Tater]

webnarc,

Your answer to LD's question give validity to any aspersions he has cast upon your intellect.

[luckydevil]

The India example was meant to show how a little bit of freedom( economic freedom) can go a long way. I thought I made it clear by now, but India has a long way to go. It is still very much of a socialist country. As a person who has been to India, I by no means consider India to be a model for other countries to emulate. In fact, I have encountered many liberals/leftists who view India as a great country, because India is direct democracy. I think they are naive and/or ignorant, but that's another debate.

Specifically, you called some one an @sshole because you became frustrated

I called JB an ******* for two reasons

1 He essentially accused me of being anti-poor

2 His play of the age card( a card he plays ALL THE TIME with me)

I must admit, it was inappropriate. So if JB is reading this, I apologize.

As for the rest of your post, I see no reason to address it. It speaks for itself

[webnarc]

Originally posted by luckydevil

The India example was meant to show how a little bit of freedom( economic freedom) can go a long way. I thought I made it clear by now, but India has a long way to go. It is still very much of a socialist country. As a person who has been to India, I by no means consider India to be model for other countries to emulate. In fact, I have encountered many liberals/leftists who view India as a great country, because India is direct democracy. I think they are naive and/or ignorant, but that's another debate.

Okay.

I called JB an ******* for two reasons

1 He essentially accused me of being anti-poor

2 His play of the age card( a card he plays ALL THE TIME with me)

I must admit, it was inappropriate. So if JB is reading this, I apologize.

I did not know this, the word was just said and it set the tone for interacting with you. I am now clear on the inappropriateness of this tone.

As for the rest of your post, I see no reason to address it. It speaks for itself

Hence the reason why I wrote the post. :laugh:

Cheers dude, have a good night

[Ancalagon the Black]

Lucky, what are your thoughts on tradable pollution rights?