free trade

[shineonyou]

i'd like to not support sweatshops, but i don't know how. when my converse all-stars give out, i'll buy no sweat sneakers, but what about everything else? what about jeans? t-shirts? that sort of thing? will any clothes at my local mall be free trade? i tried searching on google, but barely anything came up. and a lot of stuff that is not sweatshop-made seems to be made in the usa. i'd don't want to support sweatshops overseas, but i don't want to take away someone's job either! any suggestions?

[Recycler]

at http://www.americanapparel.net

[newstars]

I've come to save your day. I understand the dilema of not wanting to support sweatshop and at the same time not wanting to take away someone's job either. But understand the importance of supporting your local economy. So many jobs have been lost in the US and here in Canada as a result of companies exploiting cheap labour abroad. Industries have deteriorated, towns have become ghost towns because big companies have abandoned their hard working employees. Also take into account that when you do buy sweatshop-made clothing you support and encourage companies that exploit these workers who don't even make living wages. And when economic and labour conditions improve, these companies move to the next country with cheaper labour. So you really don't help these people even though they have a job because of these companies. They don't make enough to live and there's no room for improvement in their lives.

However, there are companies who support FAIR TRADE. And that is when companies pay fair wages to disadvantaged employees in countries where the labour conditions are poor. This website will actually be very helpful to you as they have a list of retailers who are members of their association:

http://www.fairtradefederation.com/

Also, if you like converse all-stars and want to buy sweatshop-free vegan shoes, you'll love this shoe:

http://adbusters.org/metas/corpo/blackspotsneaker/

Check out the magazine too, it's cool. The magazine developed this shoe as a protest. They searched all over Europe and Asia for a factory that treated it's employees fairly. They couldn't find one that met their standards until they got to Portugal, where the shoe is made. It's also 100% VEGAN! It's reasonably priced too, which goes to show that cheap labour costs don't get handed down to the consumer.

As posted earlier, American Apparel is a great company with great values. However, they charge way too much for their stuff. The American Apparel store here in toronto is charging like $17 for a plain t-shirt and like $70 for hoodies. While they do pay their workers great and do offer them great benefits, their prices are rediculous and i think they're milking this whole sweatshop-free advantage a little too much.

For underwear, try finding Standfield's. It's company based out of Nova Scotia, Canada. I'm not sure how available it is in the US

http://www.stanfields.com/

If you want some cool shirts, try MY company! :) We just started out this year and we have a local factory here in Toronto that makes our stuff for us. We're running low on stock right now, so some of the items aren't available on the website, but if you're interested in anything, let me know and i'll let you know if we have it. Also, ask me about measurements because the size chart doesn't seem to be working.

http://www.newstarsclothing.com

For outdoor stuff, i heard that Mountain Equipment Co-op is conscious about where their stuff is made.

http://www.mec.ca/index.html

If you're into Dickies style stuff, you can get Canadian-made work clothing from this company.

http://www.richlu.com/

As for jeans, i do own a pair of Levis that are made in Canada. I know that not all their stuff is made here, but give some of their stuff a try. Sometimes you just have to check where it's made.

Well i hope that helps! If you have any questions about my company, feel free to message me.

[DannyTanner]

A little piece of me died when Converse was sold to Nike.

[kpickell]

I love free trade agrements, but I'm not sure that's the phrase you were looking for.

I disagree with newstar's first paragraph as it reads of xenophobia to me, but his second paragraph about Fair Trade, and that link, is helpful. That might be the phrase you were meaning.

http://fairtradefederation.org/memol.html all seem like good companies. The other companies mentioned don't appeal to me because I would feel like I was just supporting more rich american/canadian workers who don't really need my help all that badly.

[MollyGoat]

You mean "fair"--"fair trade."

Free trade is the bad one. :yes:

[The Rev]

Free trade is the bad one. :yes:

I disagree.

Sure, sweatshops are bad, but they are a natural part of a growing industrial economy. And, generally, working in a sweatshop is preferable to alternative forms of employment in those economies. For example, a few years back there was an uproar over Levi's using child labor overseas. Alot of pressure was put on them to stop the practice, so they did. It was not until afterward, that they realized that the work available for children (who had to work in order for their families to survive) outside the sweatshop was far worse (prostitution, manual labor, begging, etc.)

The US went through it's own sweatshop phase, with people working 6 day, 16 hour workweeks, and it sucked bad. However, the quality of life they "enjoyed" was greater than that available working in more traditional ways such as manual agrigulture. If it weren't, then no one would have come to work at the factories.

The good news is, however, that conditions get better. In any industrialized economy, the majority of wealth produced is reinvested to create more wealth. This means, usually, investment in more efficient machinery, education and research, etc. These investments, in addition to making the rich richer, increase the productivity of each individual worker. This fact, in turn, increases the workers value on the labor market, which means higher wages and an increased quality of life.

Of course, where labor is cheapest, there will go the dollars, so we see some industries crumbling here in the US. This is a temporary thing, as the quality of life will rise in those backwater countries in Asia just as they did here. What we're seeing today is enterprising companies taking advantage of the fact that not all economies evolve together. (I think of it as a form of historical arbritraging). It won't last, however, so long as freedom of trade is allowed to run its course.

Free = Good.

:up:

The Rev

[Recycler]

You know, you can be a free-market capitalist and still support Fair Trade. That is, Free Trade and Fair Trade are not mutually exclusive. In the case of US companies seriously exploiting workers overseas, I am surprised that anyone concerned with ethics would not have a problem with that. It is true that, in many cases, such work is better than anything else (often nothing at all) available in such a country. HOWEVER, Levi, Nike, etc. have the power to pay much higher wages for fewer hours to such workers. And we can force them to do so by boycotting their products. That's free trade, with an ethical twist. Imagine that. Please make websites such as www.ChinaLaborWatch.org known to your friends.

[IamJen]

:up: recycler

Some other sites with info:

Co-op America www.sweatshops.org

Sweatshop Watch www.sweatshopwatch.org

[kpickell]

You know, you can be a free-market capitalist and still support Fair Trade. That is, Free Trade and Fair Trade are not mutually exclusive. In the case of US companies seriously exploiting workers overseas, I am surprised that anyone concerned with ethics would not have a problem with that. It is true that, in many cases, such work is better than anything else (often nothing at all) available in such a country. HOWEVER, Levi, Nike, etc. have the power to pay much higher wages for fewer hours to such workers. And we can force them to do so by boycotting their products. That's free trade, with an ethical twist. Imagine that. Please make websites such as www.ChinaLaborWatch.org known to your friends.

That's quite true. Unfortunately often when someone aska "I'm concerned with sweatshops, what should I do?" someone will simply reply by telling them "Just buy from americanappearal.net" but that doesn't address the problem. Sites like that makes things worse because the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

[newstars]

It was not until afterward, that they realized that the work available for children (who had to work in order for their families to survive) outside the sweatshop was far worse (prostitution, manual labor, begging, etc.)

The mere fact that children HAVE to work for their families to survive is disgusting. These companies obviously are aware of this and still choose factories that pay wages below living standards when they have the power to change it. You can't honestly say they're this is a good thing, that would be illogical.


The good news is, however, that conditions get better. In any industrialized economy, the majority of wealth produced is reinvested to create more wealth. This means, usually, investment in more efficient machinery, education and research, etc. These investments, in addition to making the rich richer, increase the productivity of each individual worker. This fact, in turn, increases the workers value on the labor market, which means higher wages and an increased quality of life.

Not true at all. Whenever labour conditions improve in a country, these big companies pack up and move somewhere cheaper, leaving progress to crumble. That's a fact. These companies go to these countries FOR the cheap labour, not to improve it. These companies that use this cheap labour want to keep it cheap. Companies like Nike aren't on a mission to save the world, haha.

But ya, i hope you don't think you're doing a good deed by supporting factories that physically and sexually abuse their employees, make little kids work 16 hour shifts 7 days a week for wages that don't even meet living standards, companies who are reluctant to fork over back pay, companies that have employees arrested or killed for protesting such poor business practices. If that makes you feel good, then by all means support that. That's the way things are and will be as long as people keep giving big companies all the reason to go there.


I disagree with newstar's first paragraph as it reads of xenophobia to me, but his second paragraph about Fair Trade, and that link, is helpful.

I didn't know being concerned about my local economy was xenophobic, lol. Industries have literally deteriorated, so many jobs have been exported, that's no reason to be concerned? Take Flint, Michigan for a prime example: A whole city gone to **** because a company decided to exploit cheap labour abroad. I guess losing everything you own and worked all your life for is made up by the great deed that these companies are doing in China by paying a worker wages they can't feed themself with.

Ford wanted to do the same thing here with a city called Oshawa. The place would've gone to hell if that happened. But i suppose everyone that lived there who were worried about losing everthing they owned were xenophobic, haha.


That's quite true. Unfortunately often when someone aska "I'm concerned with sweatshops, what should I do?" someone will simply reply by telling them "Just buy from americanappearal.net" but that doesn't address the problem. Sites like that makes things worse because the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

The workers AREN'T getting richer, they don't even make living wages. By going to such countries and exploiting such labour, the only people getting richer are the RICH. Workers here get poorer because their jobs are worth less and there are less jobs for them. There are poor people in the US and Canada too you know. Although i don't TOTALLY agree with American Apparel, they have great politics. AA offers health care for it's employees and family, provides ESL classes, they provide massage therapy, they pay thier employees $13/hour to start with some wages up to $27/hour, they pay for bus passes for it's employees, they provide bicycles to their employees, up to 15 paid days off, paid employee training to improve their skills. AA provides a standard of what all large companies SHOULD be like. So who exactly did you think was benefitting significantly from sweatshop labour?? And these cheap labour costs AREN'T handed down to the consumer as you can see when you walk into a Footlocker. The money goes straight into the investors' pockets and into the pockets of the people way up top.

[The Rev]

You know, you can be a free-market capitalist and still support Fair Trade. That is, Free Trade and Fair Trade are not mutually exclusive. In the case of US companies seriously exploiting workers overseas, I am surprised that anyone concerned with ethics would not have a problem with that. It is true that, in many cases, such work is better than anything else (often nothing at all) available in such a country. HOWEVER, Levi, Nike, etc. have the power to pay much higher wages for fewer hours to such workers. And we can force them to do so by boycotting their products. That's free trade, with an ethical twist. Imagine that. Please make websites such as www.ChinaLaborWatch.org known to your friends.

I agree with you. Choosing to buy based on ethical considerations is no less valid than choosing to buy based on quality or price. And who knows, maybe Levi or a company like it could improve their bottom line by paying higher wages than the market demands. Not only would it appease concerned individuals, but it would give them the cream of the labor market in that country (meaning higher quality output, as well).

I just like to emphasize that left alone, most problems like child labor, pollution, etc. will take care of themselves through the natural workings of a free market. I make these points because I am against government intervention in the economy, and issues like child labor and sweatshops are their excuse to do so. Unfortunately, government tends to screw things up more than they get them right (alot more), and then blames it on the free market (look at the history of anti-trust law and monopolies in the USA for a great example).

:D

The Rev

[The Rev]

The mere fact that children HAVE to work for their families to survive is disgusting. These companies obviously are aware of this and still choose factories that pay wages below living standards when they have the power to change it. You can't honestly say they're this is a good thing, that would be illogical.

What do you propose we do? Force companies to pay more than the market asks? If so, how do you justify it? How is it ethical to expropriate the property of one person who earns it to give an unearned benefit to another that doesn't?

And as for children, and the "mere fact" that they have to work being "disgusting," I think you need to check your history. Child labor has been the norm for centuries. It's only now, in a world that has had the benefit of capitalism, and the increases in living standards that it has brought, that you're finally starting to see child labor being no longer necessary. Prior to industrialism, people worked all day, every day, at agriculture, just for subsistence, and that included the kids.


Not true at all. Whenever labour conditions improve in a country, these big companies pack up and move somewhere cheaper, leaving progress to crumble. That's a fact. These companies go to these countries FOR the cheap labour, not to improve it. These companies that use this cheap labour want to keep it cheap. Companies like Nike aren't on a mission to save the world, haha.

I addressed that point, please re-read my post above. :rolleyes:


But ya, i hope you don't think you're doing a good deed by supporting factories that physically and sexually abuse their employees, make little kids work 16 hour shifts 7 days a week for wages that don't even meet living standards, companies who are reluctant to fork over back pay, companies that have employees arrested or killed for protesting such poor business practices. If that makes you feel good, then by all means support that. That's the way things are and will be as long as people keep giving big companies all the reason to go there.

The only way to improve these conditions is to allow those economies to develop. Take slavery, the most heinous state of working conditions, as an example. Slavery, as an institution, was destroyed by capitalism. The increased value of labor made slavery unnecessary, as economic growth increased the individuals productive ability via machines and better systems of organization. To function in such a system requires brain power, not back power. Slaves, who were required to be uneducated to keep them weak, could never function in an economy that requires a greater degree of thinking power with each step forward.

I don't support abuse of human beings or animals, but I'm not about to ignore history and rant about how wrong it is and how someone "should do something!" without thinking it through. Economic progress through capitalism improves conditions for everyone. The historical support is incontrovertable. On the other hand, the history of government intervention in economies to "force things to be fair, better, etc." goes hand in hand with the worst chapters of human suffering and oppression in history.

So, what do you think would be the best course of action?

:guitar:

The Rev

[newstars]

The most obvious and most sensible solution is Fair Trade.


What do you propose we do? Force companies to pay more than the market asks? If so, how do you justify it?

How do these multi-million dollar companies justify paying these workers less than living wages? I will agree with you in the principle of no jobs is worse than horrible jobs with long hours, no labour rights, and wages you can't even feed yourself with. But if you believe that these sweatshops are part of a process in which an economy will build off of, then you certainly would agree that if the workers made proper wages this progression would move a lot faster. I also agree with Recycler. Boycotting these companies (if enough people could be aware and active in this) would pressure them to do the right thing.


Slavery, as an institution, was destroyed by capitalism.

It was capitalism that created it and did all that it could to keep it in place. The rich back then, like the rich now, preferred slave labour because it meant more money in their pockets. It was the endless fight of the african americans with the help of the north that ended slavery. Don't try to thank capitalism for that one, lol.


To function in such a system requires brain power, not back power. Slaves, who were required to be uneducated to keep them weak, could never function in an economy that requires a greater degree of thinking power with each step forward.

So wouldn't it make sense if employees were paid enough to support their families so their kids could go to school instead of being forced to work? How does supporting a system which represses people help?


I addressed that point, please re-read my post above.

All you said was, a free market system will magically fix the problem. I told you why i disagreed, re-read my post if you missed that part.


I just like to emphasize that left alone, most problems like child labor, pollution, etc. will take care of themselves through the natural workings of a free market. I make these points because I am against government intervention in the economy, and issues like child labor and sweatshops are their excuse to do so.

This is probably your worst point. How one can honestly believe that large corporations can be trusted to make our world a safer and better place is beyond me. And to use pollution as an example! haha sorry, i can't come to a common ground with you on that one, and i don't even feel the need to provide examples. Government intervention is absolutely, undeniably essential for not only the better interests of the people, but for the economy as well. Thanks to the people who fought for these causes and the government that enforced them we have:

-minimum wage
-health care (here in Canada)
-labour rights
-proper ethnic representation in the work place
-equal pay for women for doing the same work as men (and women still make less on average! thanks free market system!)
-laws and regulations that protect our environment and the people and animals that inhabit it.
-laws which prohibit unfair and unethical business practices

and i could go on. The only thing we have to thank these companies for is giving the government a reason to put these laws and regulations in place.

The insurance industry here in Canada is a not an extreme example of why government intervention is needed, but a good one none the less. Car insurance used to be provided by the government and it's a shame it still isn't. Today, through collusion, insurance companies have been increasing their rates (while they have been maintain record profits) with the most rediculous justifications. It's gotten to the point where many people can't even afford to have a car. It's only a matter of time before the government HAS to step in to regulate this unfair and illegal business practice. For one, people are fed up with it, but the government must also intervene to protect car companies, which are suffering in sales. Without government intervention, the system destroys itself. And as the gap between the rich and the poor grows (which it is, thanks to the system), the system also destroys itself. I believe that when a society prospers together, it is a healthy economy. It's a pretty simple economics equation actually.

As for my belief in supporting my local economy, i find it hard to understand why people must argue this. But i guess you believe so strongly in slave labour that supporting your local economy is wrong. Call it selfish, but i am concerned about my own well being and the people that make my country the great place that it is. I am NOT in support of the exportation of jobs to other countries because CEO's want an extra million in their pocket at the end of the year. I am NOT in support of the corrosion of the progress that Unions and hard working people have fought so hard for for so many years. A decent, simple thing like job security has become a joke to people. Sure, progress needs to be made abroad too, but i don't want to support it unless it's being done the right way. And right now, i don't believe it is, especially when big companies like Nike have all the power to make it right and make a difference. And you might argue that they don't HAVE TO, but i think they do. I think a large corporation like that MUST pay the debt that is OWED to the people that help make it successful. And since these companies won't do that, someone must force them, i.e. the goverment. Unfortunately in the current system, governments in developing nations are forced into a position where if they do improve their labour laws, then the big companies take their business elsewhere. So that's why i'm with Recycler in boycotting such companies! :)

Anyways, that's my take on it. You probably won't change my mind and I probably won't change yours. So i'm just going to refrain from wasting my time writing long posts like this, haha. :tired:

Nice talkin though,

Chris

[kpickell]

How do these multi-million dollar companies justify paying these workers less than living wages? I will agree with you in the principle of no jobs is worse than horrible jobs with long hours, no labour rights, and wages you can't even feed yourself with. But if you believe that these sweatshops are part of a process in which an economy will build off of, then you certainly would agree that if the workers made proper wages this progression would move a lot faster. I also agree with Recycler. Boycotting these companies (if enough people could be aware and active in this) would pressure them to do the right thing.
I disagree that boycotting these companies will do any good. I think boycotting and buying from American companies simply causes Americans to once again get better jobs while people in another country starve, and we feel good about that because we're boycotting something. The thing is these companies are paying better wages than are currently present in those countries. I agree that higher wages would be great, but you have to get there through competition, not through boycotting. We need to encourage more American and Canadian businesses to move their factories overseas. They more businesses that open up in poor countries, the more competition there will be and the better the jobs will become.

[kpickell]

As for your part about supporting our local economy, you've already answered it.
As for my belief in supporting my local economy, i find it hard to understand why people must argue this. Call it selfish, but i am concerned about my own well being and the people that make my country the great place that it is.
That's nice that you're concerned with your country, I guess. Personally I think our country is already rich enough and there are other people that need our help more. Even the homeless here have it much better than the average person in a 3rd world country. Even if you can't find a job or a place to live, we have government programs to help you. Other countries don't even have that much. Refusing to support any company based in a 3rd world country isn't going to help anyone except the nations that are already rich.

[The Rev]

The most obvious and most sensible solution is Fair Trade.

Chris

I have found that the biggest problem I have in making arguments supporting capitalism comes from the lack of knowledge that most folks have about it. For example, to say that capitalists prefer slaves and to use the Civil War as an example of how capitalist efforts to promote slavery were defeated, is ludicrous. The North was the industrial (IOW, the ones that applied capitalist ideals) part of the country at the time, where the south was still primarily agrarian. Agrarian cultures have always relied on slavery, where capitalists never have. To say that capitalists invented the institution of slavery reveals how little you understand what capitalism is all about. Capitalism has only been around for 2-3 centuries. Slavery has existed since before the dawn of civilization.

I would recommend a book, if you care to read it: "Economics In One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. It dispells a great many of the economic myths which support the idea that government intervention in the sphere of trade is necessary, and gives a good overview of economics without the statist/Keynesian BS that's peddled as economics in most public schools.

:D

The Rev

[newstars]

My statement about capitalism CREATING slavery was a wrong one to make. I apologize for that. Obviously slavery has been around for centuries. From my understanding though, it was the rich capitalists who did what they could to keep slavery in place. But what can't be argued though is that these corporations want to keep things the way they are simply because it is favourable to them.

Now, just for the record, i am not against capitalism. I run my own business, I am a capitalist. What i don't understand, is how you think corporations can make good of this world when their primary function is to make money, no matter what the cost to humans or the environment. THAT is ludcrous. There is a huge need for laws and regulations to keep them in line If that weren't the case, we wouldn't have such laws in place. Corporations still literally get away with murder with a mere slap on the wrist. You can't deny that this has occured and still occurs. So does the government need to play the referee to an extent? Of course.


I disagree that boycotting these companies will do any good. I think boycotting and buying from American companies simply causes Americans to once again get better jobs while people in another country starve,...

So you think supporting a company like American Apparel, which has good morals, sets a great standard for other companies, shares it's wealth by paying it's employees exceptionally well, supplies them with affordable health care, gives them job security is bad. But supporting an American company that exploits cheap labour abroad where employees are abused, forced to work long hours, given no method of action even when the company owes them back pay for a month, is GOOD? Bizarre. Again, who is getting rich when Nike goes to a chinese sweatshop to make their shoes? Is it Mr. Knight and all his buddies or the workers making 33 cents an hour? :think:


We need to encourage more American and Canadian businesses to move their factories overseas.

You gotta be kidding. Yes lets export more of our jobs so more people become poor here. Great idea! The US ranks one of the worst industrialized nations for equality of income, with only Mexico and Russia below them. I guess you're hoping for the number one spot, lol. Lets undo all the work unions and the working class have fought for in our countries. Lets lessen the value of our labour and put our kids to work too!

[IamJen]

You gotta be kidding. Yes lets export more of our jobs so more people become poor here. Great idea! The US ranks one of the worst industrialized nations for equality of income, with only Mexico and Russia below them. I guess you're hoping for the number one spot, lol.
Documentation, please.

Now, I don't support the moving of jobs overseas to crappy, unsafe factories where they pay low wages, use child labor, etc. etc. Furthermore, the loss of U.S. jobs hits pretty close to home here in western Michigan. However, I have a hard time believing this.

[newstars]

Documentation, please.

Now, I don't support the moving of jobs overseas to crappy, unsafe factories where they pay low wages, use child labor, etc. etc. Furthermore, the loss of U.S. jobs hits pretty close to home here in western Michigan. However, I have a hard time believing this.

It's a fact. Look up Jeremy Rifkin and his book "The European Dream". I saw one of his lectures here in toronto on TV, he had some surprising facts. Child Mortality in the US as a result of growing poverty was also pretty scary.

[The Rev]

What i don't understand, is how you think corporations can make good of this world when their primary function is to make money, no matter what the cost to humans or the environment. THAT is ludcrous.

How do you make money? By creating value that did not exist before, or by destroying it? If corporations are making money, they are doing so by creating goods and services, increasing the overall wealth of "this world."

As for the "no matter what cost to humans and the environment" part, you need to stop reading Rifkin (and other proselytizers for socialism), and start taking an objective look at history. The overall quality of life has always risen the fastest, for all members participating in an economy, where capitalist systems have been in place. If the people in foreign countries are still screwed after US corporations have been there awhile, I think the place to look for problems is in the policies of the governments of those countries.

:think:

The Rev

[kpickell]

So you think supporting a company like American Apparel, which has good morals, sets a great standard for other companies, shares it's wealth by paying it's employees exceptionally well, supplies them with affordable health care, gives them job security is bad. But supporting an American company that exploits cheap labour abroad where employees are abused, forced to work long hours, given no method of action even when the company owes them back pay for a month, is GOOD? Bizarre. Again, who is getting rich when Nike goes to a chinese sweatshop to make their shoes? Is it Mr. Knight and all his buddies or the workers making 33 cents an hour? :think:
The problem is that American Apparel hires American workers.


You gotta be kidding. Yes lets export more of our jobs so more people become poor here. Great idea! The US ranks one of the worst industrialized nations for equality of income, with only Mexico and Russia below them. I guess you're hoping for the number one spot, lol. Lets undo all the work unions and the working class have fought for in our countries. Lets lessen the value of our labour and put our kids to work too!
I don't understand what you're saying. What does equality of income mean, and why does it matter? Do you believe that things are worse in the US than they are in other countries? Do you think Americans need more jobs moreso than the Chinese?

[newstars]

As for the "no matter what cost to humans and the environment" part, you need to stop reading Rifkin (and other proselytizers for socialism), and start taking an objective look at history. The overall quality of life has always risen the fastest, for all members participating in an economy, where capitalist systems have been in place.

So what you're saying is: be closed minded, only read what you want me to read and believe that corporations have never been guilty of polluting water supplies that have subsequently killed good chunks of towns with cancer, that corporations have not been guilty abandoning towns that solely relied on it's operations thus leaving many people with next to nothing, that corporations NEVER engage in illegal business practices (ie inside trading, collusion, etc..), that corporations have never and will never commit any bad at all. That's what i gather. But you can't be that naive. We all know and have heard about the bad things corporations have done. And it's no surprise that they do them. They function solely to make money.

So with the assumption that you're not so blind to believe that corporations aren't capable of any bad, inhumane business practices, i suppose you just believe they should not be held accountable for them?

I'm not disputing the pros to capitalism, cause like i said i am a capitalist. Maybe not in it's truest definition, but i do run a business. I do believe in the freedom to make money in the process. But i also believe in regulation. Businesses need to be regulated like people do. I certainly don't believe in Anarchy. It seems like you do, for businesses at least.

I truly believe that a society that progresses together is a healthy society. And that's something you seem to believe too since you think this world will benefit if 3rd world countries have the chance to develop. But currently the rich are only looking after their own interests as clearly shown in the growing gap between the rich and the poor. I really don't think that the change in pay equality is something you can dismiss by simply saying "don't believe what Rifkin says, it's nonsense." It's there, it's fact and i don't believe it benefits an economy in the long run. You've said it yourself, the more money people have to spend, the more goes back into the economy. We can agree on that very basic economic principle i'm sure.


The problem is that American Apparel hires American workers.


I don't understand what you're saying. What does equality of income mean, and why does it matter? Do you believe that things are worse in the US than they are in other countries? Do you think Americans need more jobs moreso than the Chinese?

As for your question. Pay equality refers to the amount that the richest few are making in comparison to the poor majority, aka the gap between the rich and the poor. It has been growing at an alarming rate in your country to the point where it is one of the worst out of all industrialized nations. That is partially due to the loss of jobs to abroad. You obviously think that's a worthy sacrifice, and that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But my other argument towards that scary figure pertains to my argument towards The Rev.

You think Americans don't deserve well paying jobs, and i can't agree with that. I just don't see a problem with giving americans jobs. I really don't see a problem with a company like AA setting labour standards that have been lost in your and my country. Whether you think exporting jobs to China is good or bad, how can you have a problem with a garment factory in the US? Do you believe we should export the WHOLE garmet industry to 3rd world countries? I'm personally not willing to sacrifice my right in a capitalist system to pursue which ever legal business i want to choose.

If you care so pationately about people in 3rd world countries as you claim, why not try to make a real difference? Sponsor a child or something, so they get an education instead of feeling good about yourself for buying a $20 t-shirt that cost a penny to pay some 12 year old chinese kid to make?

[kpickell]

As for your question. Pay equality refers to the amount that the richest few are making in comparison to the poor majority, aka the gap between the rich and the poor. It has been growing at an alarming rate in your country to the point where it is one of the worst out of all industrialized nations. That is partially due to the loss of jobs to abroad. You obviously think that's a worthy sacrifice, and that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But my other argument towards that scary figure pertains to my argument towards The Rev.

You think Americans don't deserve well paying jobs, and i can't agree with that. I just don't see a problem with giving americans jobs. I really don't see a problem with a company like AA setting labour standards that have been lost in your and my country. Whether you think exporting jobs to China is good or bad, how can you have a problem with a garment factory in the US? Do you believe we should export the WHOLE garmet industry to 3rd world countries? I'm personally not willing to sacrifice my right in a capitalist system to pursue which ever legal business i want to choose.

If you care so pationately about people in 3rd world countries as you claim, why not try to make a real difference? Sponsor a child or something, so they get an education instead of feeling good about yourself for buying a $20 t-shirt that cost a penny to pay some 12 year old chinese kid to make?

It's not that I don't think Americans should have good jobs, it's just that I don't think Americans are any more special than any other group of people.

As for your last two questions, how do you know what I do and don't do?

[newstars]

It's not that I don't think Americans should have good jobs, it's just that I don't think Americans are any more special than any other group of people.?

Well it just seems that you're so opposed to American Apparel and what they're doing, that's why i made those assumptions. Perhaps if you were more aware of the evolving economic state of your country, you'd believe a little more in the protection of your local job market.


As for your last two questions, how do you know what I do and don't do?

Well i'm glad to assume that you do sponsor or make donations. I think you're making far more of a difference doing that than supporting slave labour. That's something i hope to do some day when i have the funds.