Subject:
|
Re: The US gives too much/not enough aid
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 20:52:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1046 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> In other words, if the US, as a whole, didn't buy Nikey shoes that are made
> 'off shore' in sweat shops, that these people making 10 cents a day in these
> sweat shops wouldn't be forced to make your shoes for the pittance that
> they're getting.
>
> I'm not saying that this is the scenario for *everything*, but it does
> happen so you can get your cheap shoes in your malls. The consequences of
> US consumerism is far-reaching.
Not to get off-topic (well, this is the off-topic forum), but I am curious,
what would the people making 10 cents a day make as income if U.S.ians
didn't buy Nike shoes? Would they make nothing a day? Are there jobs in
their countries that pay more than 10 cents a day? Why would they take a
job for Nike if it paid less than other jobs available to them?
I'm not trying to say paying them only 10 cents a day is right, for
certainly it is wrong indeed when you consider the profits the company will
make at their expense. But, is it right to imple that because we buy Nike
products that we are taking something from the sweatshop workers. Seems to
me, they are being offered poverty-grade-2 rather than poverty-grade-1.
Buying Nike might not be as good as donating to UNICEF or volunteering for
the Peace Corp, but suggesting it is the cause for poor conditions for 3rd
world peoples seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Oh, and by the way, the average US consumer does not consider the shoes in
our malls to be "cheap". Cheap implies inexpensive, which most footware is
not. The boots I am wearing right now cost me a third of my weekly income.
I do not consider that cheap.
> >
> > Prove that assertion.
>
> Prove? Ozone depletion, LA smog, toxic waste dumps--you want to dip a cup
> in one of the great lakes and take a swig? Proof? Walk around.
I have heard that LA is no longer the worst city for air pollution any more,
since years of emmissions regulations have been in place to counter that
reputation. Certainly other nations like Mexico, India, and who knows where
else have fewer emmissions restrictions that the US. And in the US I
suspect other cities are now worse than LA. Anyone ever fly into Pittsburgh
on a sunny day and notice that layer of brown stuff the plane drops through?
...As for the great lakes, I have visited two of them, and you are
absolutely correct. And I agree it is probably mostly from US cities... But
isn't there another country that borders those lakes somewhere...?
> Now there's the rub--we're actually going to have to *do* some research, do
> some cost analysis and figure out where best to send the money to help our
> fellow person on this planet. Instead of giving money to crack-pot
> dictators, get the money to the people. It won't be easy, but we can start
> in our own back yard--if a major corporation is making their product off
> shore and paying their workers a pittance and selling to us the consumer,
> we, as consumers, can boycott, but more important, the gov't can
> sanction/tarrif/make it hurt the pocketbook of these corporations.
Unfortunately the politicians who might pass laws to sanction all-to-often
have their hands in those pocketbooks too. The people who work to run these
kinds of corporations are too greedy for the bottom line. They want to cut
costs to increase profits. That's why they move off-shore to begin with,
since American workers demand more pay. Even if you could somehow enforce
wage laws internationally, that would only serve to drive up the cost of the
final product. What's next? Am I going to have to take out a mortage to buy
new sneakers?
-H.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The US gives too much/not enough aid
|
| (...) What about US corporations preventing their laborors in the third world from unionizing? I'm sure they have had a hand in local politics as well. Didn't anyone see Zoolander (half joking). (...) Pittsburgh has largely cleaned itself up. Most (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The US gives too much/not enough aid
|
| (...) Not hard at all--science. More specifics--space program, aeronautics, other stuff--yes the world benefitted from these things but specifically, the US--letting in German scientists and turning a blind eye to some atrocities during the war they (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
161 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
