The story goes that people are abused in sweatshops, that they work in inhumane conditions and people in the west are profiting from other people’s misery.
There is one fatal flaw in this argument. The people working in the sweatshop have a choice.
If the pain and suffering they experience in the sweatshop is more than the wage is worth than they can choose not to work there.
When you get do-gooders in the west saying these sweatshops should be closed what they are really saying is that these people working in sweatshops should be fired.
That is the long and the short of it. People who want to get rid of sweatshops want people in the developing world to lose their job. It’s just that simple.
Okay conditions may be terrible, but how is making more people unemployed going to lead to sweatshops paying people more?
People get paid low wages because there are more people than there are jobs.
Businesses don’t have to compete with each other to attract workers ie businesses don’t have to compete with each other on pay because they have the power.
On the other hand the less jobs there are per person the higher wages have to be to get workers.
So in summary, sweatshops should be welcomed. It makes people richer, it creates more opportunities for businesses as there are more people able to buy products and service. This is turn creates more competition between businesses to pay higher wages to attract workers.
It really is that simple. Sweatshops create a virtuous circle of prosperity.
The next time you see someone who wants to close sweatshops, remember what they are actually asking for, they want people in developing countries to lose their jobs.
Their choice is not that simple if there is a landlord charging rent on the local agricultural land which there probably is, and the level of the rent being the factor.
Nope, they don’t really have a choice. Usually the only alternative in those countries is prostitution or selling their organs.
Which is one of many reasons why I think people find it preferable to work in a sweat shop….
Well if I was faced with the choice of either working at a sweatshop or selling my kidneys I would probably take the sweatshop option too. But I think it would be an even better idea if they passed legislation that protects the labor in those countries. Of course that could mean less profits for Apple and other megacorps but well… a) I don’t care and b) the gap in “wage cost” between the first and third world is so abysmal that you could drastically improve the working conditions there without risking corporations moving their factories back to America. Of course the governments of those nations would never do something in that direction because half of them are subservient to the IMF and the other half are open dictatorships. Soon there will be sweatshops in Greece as well. Already the ground has been laid by announcing the creation of so called “Special Economic Zones”. The european Indochina is in the making.
You disagree with my point that closing sweatshops directly leads to people losing their job?