I'm shocked at the number of people calling this a 'good thing for the Chinese.'
You seem to be missing the point that the "good thing" is that this sort of economic development is enabling China (and India also) to grow and elevate the condition of people's lives in aggregate and over time.
You seem to be missing the point that the "good thing" is that this sort of economic development is enabling China (and India also) to grow and elevate the condition of people's lives in aggregate and over time.
It's kind of hard to miss that "point." It's been the argument favoring outsorcing labor to sweatshops since their existence. The argument behind my statements is that it isn't necessary to emulate the mistakes and injustice in our own industrial past in order for other countries to develop functional, beneficial economies.
it isn't necessary to emulate the mistakes and injustice in our own industrial past
Hmmm...well, if by "emulate" you mean deliberate action, I'd agree...if by "emulate" you mean natual order of development...then I'm not so sure.
A country that has 50-60% of its population living on a day-to-day existence of less than US$1/day is not going to suddenly jump to the level of where the western world is from a legal, social and economic perspective.
Again, I strongly suggest Jeffrey Sachs' book "The End of Poverty" for more insight on this matter.
To be more precise, the Germans have the DIN standard, which has traditionally been the strictest. Britain has the British Standard or BS Kitemark. I'm sure other European countries have their own also. These national standards however are gradually being superseded by European Community normalised standards in order that there's one standard Europe wide. That's so that there's a single market and each country can compete fairly with each other without barriers. As you can imagine, it takes a while for everyone to agree on them. Standards in Greece aren't as strict as Germany.
If you look on the back of your Mac you'll see a 'CE' mark indicating it conforms to European normalised standards. These CE standards generally are a dumbing down so that poorer nations don't have to meet Germany, Britain or France's higher standards.
Your suggestion that Europe produces standards in order to prevent competition is way off although I can understand why meeting DIN standards might be seen as such.
European agricultural standards are always fun ones for us Brits though. At one point Europe produced a standard for bananas that wasn't curvy. This seems to have been because Britain buys most of it's bananas from (British) Commonwealth countries where they're curvy. The French didn't like that. Neither did the USA. Funnily enough, the Daily Mail didn't like that either.
We had equipment from various countries that met the DIN standard, never any other.
$100 a month is not a fantastic wage in a developing country. It is A wage, which is more than a lot have. But an internationally responsible corporation would not pay such a scant wage and subject people to 15-hour per day workdays. Period.
As a related aside, I live in a country where the average wage is 200 Euro / Month with 40% unemployment. A family of four with this can afford a one-room apartment, a loaf of bread per day, veggies and fresh stuff, and maybe eat a nice meal with meat once per week. The family has almost no extra to make any sort of safety net, so they are 100% dependent on that job, and if that job goes away, the living conditions deteriorate rapidly. And because employment prospects are dim, the worker earning the salary will do practically anything to keep the job, whether it's pushups or 15-hour days or a paycut. The worker has no power whatsoever.
And this is in a country with a reasonable standard-of-living, somewhere like China this would be magnified 10x. I'm shocked at the number of people calling this a 'good thing for the Chinese.'
$100 in China goes much further than it does where you live. It goes even further in Vietnam. Further in many countries in Africa.
It also depends on whether your economy is on the way up, or on the way down. It's also reletive within the country itself. For years, in China, there was little prospect in the countryside. People flocked to the cities. That's changed slightly over the past year.
Companies pay the wages prevelant in the area. They can't come in and demand that their manufacturers suddenly offer wages several times what is being paid elsewhere. They can demand decent wages for what similar jobs in that country go for, same with working conditions.
In the US, we didn't have laws against sweatshops until the Triangle Factory fire early last century. But, if you look around in areas in many cities, you will still find some. Nothing is perfect.
Hmmm...well, if by "emulate" you mean deliberate action, I'd agree...if by "emulate" you mean natual order of development...then I'm not so sure.
A country that has 50-60% of its population living on a day-to-day existence of less than US$1/day is not going to suddenly jump to the level of where the western world is from a legal, social and economic perspective.
Again, I strongly suggest Jeffrey Sachs' book "The End of Poverty" for more insight on this matter.
I don't see 15 hour workdays and worker exploitation as being part of the "natural order of development." Low wages though, yes. I think that many people in this thread see this "natural order" as requiring that labor have no power. Am I wrong?
I am not anti-globalisation, however I think with globalisation comes a huge responsibility. For the first time in human history, we have the power to lift billions out of poverty...or we could use that same power to exploit poor countries in order to feed our own resource-intensive development.
It should also be mentioned that world resources simply can't support China, India, Vietnam, and other developing countries, if they were to ever reach the level of industrialization as the Western World. It has to be done differently this time.
I don't see 15 hour workdays and worker exploitation as being part of the "natural order of development." Low wages though, yes. I think that many people in this thread see this "natural order" as requiring that labor have no power. Am I wrong?
I am not anti-globalisation, however I think with globalisation comes a huge responsibility. For the first time in human history, we have the power to lift billions out of poverty...or we could use that same power to exploit poor countries in order to feed our own resource-intensive development.
It should also be mentioned that world resources simply can't support China, India, Vietnam, and other developing countries, if they were to ever reach the level of industrialization as the Western World. It has to be done differently this time.
I wish it weren't true, but you just have to look at the history of slavery over the thousands of years of history to see the truth of that. After that came serfdom, which was a great improvement. Then indentured employment. After that came 12 to 18 hour days, six or seven days a week. Only last century did laws limiting working hours and days come into effect. Do you really think that this is going to happen in these countries where the only concerns of the governments is to increase developement as soon as possible? China wants to become a major world economic power as quickly as they can. That, and social order is all they care about. It's doubtful that they would approve anyone paying much above the going rates, because that would make them less competitive, and would encourage workers elsewhere to become unhappy. Other countries are trying to be more competitive than China, and advertise that cost there are even lower. Do you think you can fight this?
I don't see 15 hour workdays and worker exploitation as being part of the "natural order of development." Low wages though, yes. I think that many people in this thread see this "natural order" as requiring that labor have no power. Am I wrong?
Long work days and low wages are two sides of the same coin. If they wanted to work 8 hours per day, perhaps they'd get paid 1/2 as much. These two are intertwined. You can't really separate them (for most occupations). Don't know how these particular people are paid (by the hour or piece work)...but hours for dollars is the way most people work.
EDIT: With regard to "worker exploitation", it is unclear that this is happening in this particular example.
Quote:
Originally posted by progmac
For the first time in human history, we have the power to lift billions out of poverty...
And this is actually happening. Not as quickly as some would like, but it is happening (funny thing is that if we were to suddenly implement minimum wages or maximum hours or both...it would likely stall or significantly slow this growth and will almost certainly create greater unemployment in those areas). China, India and Eastern Europe are great examples. Africa is a very poor example right now. Central and South America are somewhere inbetween.
EDIT: With regard to "worker exploitation", it is unclear that this is happening in this particular example.
yeah, to be fair we don't have very much information in this particular case.
there seems to be some confusion as to what the anti-worker exploitation crowd wants. it isn't necessarily 8-hour workdays or a $6/hour minimum wage, but it is that labor not be completely at the mercy of their employer. you say this is impossible, i say that it is possible. we could each site a dozen studies to back what we think. i'm not sure where else to take this debate.
regarding serfdom and such, my argument is that because of globalization, it isn't necessary to take the "traditional" path to a decent society, which seems to be painted as a thousand years of misery followed by a hundred years of prosperity.
i'd be curious to hear the response to the argument about world resources not supporting countries that industrialized in the same manner in the US or Western Europe.
there seems to be some confusion as to what the anti-worker exploitation crowd wants...it is that labor not be completely at the mercy of their employer
I agree. That would be slavery. Freedom is vital for economic development...freedom in employment is part of that equation for sure.
Quote:
Originally posted by progmac
you say this is impossible
Wooaaaa! I don't think I ever said that.
Quote:
Originally posted by progmac
i'd be curious to hear the response to the argument about world resources not supporting countries that industrialized in the same manner in the US or Western Europe.
Well, I'd be curious about some citations to show what that means. The phrase "world resources" is broad and vague, and the phrase "not supporting countries that industrialized in the same manner in the US or Western Europe" isn't much more precise.
Comments
Originally posted by progmac
I'm shocked at the number of people calling this a 'good thing for the Chinese.'
You seem to be missing the point that the "good thing" is that this sort of economic development is enabling China (and India also) to grow and elevate the condition of people's lives in aggregate and over time.
Originally posted by vinney57
Phew! Thank goodness melgross explained it all for us!
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
You seem to be missing the point that the "good thing" is that this sort of economic development is enabling China (and India also) to grow and elevate the condition of people's lives in aggregate and over time.
It's kind of hard to miss that "point." It's been the argument favoring outsorcing labor to sweatshops since their existence. The argument behind my statements is that it isn't necessary to emulate the mistakes and injustice in our own industrial past in order for other countries to develop functional, beneficial economies.
Originally posted by progmac
it isn't necessary to emulate the mistakes and injustice in our own industrial past
Hmmm...well, if by "emulate" you mean deliberate action, I'd agree...if by "emulate" you mean natual order of development...then I'm not so sure.
A country that has 50-60% of its population living on a day-to-day existence of less than US$1/day is not going to suddenly jump to the level of where the western world is from a legal, social and economic perspective.
Again, I strongly suggest Jeffrey Sachs' book "The End of Poverty" for more insight on this matter.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
To be more precise, the Germans have the DIN standard, which has traditionally been the strictest. Britain has the British Standard or BS Kitemark. I'm sure other European countries have their own also. These national standards however are gradually being superseded by European Community normalised standards in order that there's one standard Europe wide. That's so that there's a single market and each country can compete fairly with each other without barriers. As you can imagine, it takes a while for everyone to agree on them. Standards in Greece aren't as strict as Germany.
If you look on the back of your Mac you'll see a 'CE' mark indicating it conforms to European normalised standards. These CE standards generally are a dumbing down so that poorer nations don't have to meet Germany, Britain or France's higher standards.
Your suggestion that Europe produces standards in order to prevent competition is way off although I can understand why meeting DIN standards might be seen as such.
European agricultural standards are always fun ones for us Brits though. At one point Europe produced a standard for bananas that wasn't curvy. This seems to have been because Britain buys most of it's bananas from (British) Commonwealth countries where they're curvy. The French didn't like that. Neither did the USA. Funnily enough, the Daily Mail didn't like that either.
We had equipment from various countries that met the DIN standard, never any other.
Originally posted by progmac
$100 a month is not a fantastic wage in a developing country. It is A wage, which is more than a lot have. But an internationally responsible corporation would not pay such a scant wage and subject people to 15-hour per day workdays. Period.
As a related aside, I live in a country where the average wage is 200 Euro / Month with 40% unemployment. A family of four with this can afford a one-room apartment, a loaf of bread per day, veggies and fresh stuff, and maybe eat a nice meal with meat once per week. The family has almost no extra to make any sort of safety net, so they are 100% dependent on that job, and if that job goes away, the living conditions deteriorate rapidly. And because employment prospects are dim, the worker earning the salary will do practically anything to keep the job, whether it's pushups or 15-hour days or a paycut. The worker has no power whatsoever.
And this is in a country with a reasonable standard-of-living, somewhere like China this would be magnified 10x. I'm shocked at the number of people calling this a 'good thing for the Chinese.'
$100 in China goes much further than it does where you live. It goes even further in Vietnam. Further in many countries in Africa.
It also depends on whether your economy is on the way up, or on the way down. It's also reletive within the country itself. For years, in China, there was little prospect in the countryside. People flocked to the cities. That's changed slightly over the past year.
Companies pay the wages prevelant in the area. They can't come in and demand that their manufacturers suddenly offer wages several times what is being paid elsewhere. They can demand decent wages for what similar jobs in that country go for, same with working conditions.
In the US, we didn't have laws against sweatshops until the Triangle Factory fire early last century. But, if you look around in areas in many cities, you will still find some. Nothing is perfect.
Originally posted by monkeyastronaut
Yes, very amusing.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Hmmm...well, if by "emulate" you mean deliberate action, I'd agree...if by "emulate" you mean natual order of development...then I'm not so sure.
A country that has 50-60% of its population living on a day-to-day existence of less than US$1/day is not going to suddenly jump to the level of where the western world is from a legal, social and economic perspective.
Again, I strongly suggest Jeffrey Sachs' book "The End of Poverty" for more insight on this matter.
I don't see 15 hour workdays and worker exploitation as being part of the "natural order of development." Low wages though, yes. I think that many people in this thread see this "natural order" as requiring that labor have no power. Am I wrong?
I am not anti-globalisation, however I think with globalisation comes a huge responsibility. For the first time in human history, we have the power to lift billions out of poverty...or we could use that same power to exploit poor countries in order to feed our own resource-intensive development.
It should also be mentioned that world resources simply can't support China, India, Vietnam, and other developing countries, if they were to ever reach the level of industrialization as the Western World. It has to be done differently this time.
Originally posted by progmac
I don't see 15 hour workdays and worker exploitation as being part of the "natural order of development." Low wages though, yes. I think that many people in this thread see this "natural order" as requiring that labor have no power. Am I wrong?
I am not anti-globalisation, however I think with globalisation comes a huge responsibility. For the first time in human history, we have the power to lift billions out of poverty...or we could use that same power to exploit poor countries in order to feed our own resource-intensive development.
It should also be mentioned that world resources simply can't support China, India, Vietnam, and other developing countries, if they were to ever reach the level of industrialization as the Western World. It has to be done differently this time.
I wish it weren't true, but you just have to look at the history of slavery over the thousands of years of history to see the truth of that. After that came serfdom, which was a great improvement. Then indentured employment. After that came 12 to 18 hour days, six or seven days a week. Only last century did laws limiting working hours and days come into effect. Do you really think that this is going to happen in these countries where the only concerns of the governments is to increase developement as soon as possible? China wants to become a major world economic power as quickly as they can. That, and social order is all they care about. It's doubtful that they would approve anyone paying much above the going rates, because that would make them less competitive, and would encourage workers elsewhere to become unhappy. Other countries are trying to be more competitive than China, and advertise that cost there are even lower. Do you think you can fight this?
Originally posted by progmac
I don't see 15 hour workdays and worker exploitation as being part of the "natural order of development." Low wages though, yes. I think that many people in this thread see this "natural order" as requiring that labor have no power. Am I wrong?
Long work days and low wages are two sides of the same coin. If they wanted to work 8 hours per day, perhaps they'd get paid 1/2 as much. These two are intertwined. You can't really separate them (for most occupations). Don't know how these particular people are paid (by the hour or piece work)...but hours for dollars is the way most people work.
EDIT: With regard to "worker exploitation", it is unclear that this is happening in this particular example.
Originally posted by progmac
For the first time in human history, we have the power to lift billions out of poverty...
And this is actually happening. Not as quickly as some would like, but it is happening (funny thing is that if we were to suddenly implement minimum wages or maximum hours or both...it would likely stall or significantly slow this growth and will almost certainly create greater unemployment in those areas). China, India and Eastern Europe are great examples. Africa is a very poor example right now. Central and South America are somewhere inbetween.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
EDIT: With regard to "worker exploitation", it is unclear that this is happening in this particular example.
yeah, to be fair we don't have very much information in this particular case.
there seems to be some confusion as to what the anti-worker exploitation crowd wants. it isn't necessarily 8-hour workdays or a $6/hour minimum wage, but it is that labor not be completely at the mercy of their employer. you say this is impossible, i say that it is possible. we could each site a dozen studies to back what we think. i'm not sure where else to take this debate.
regarding serfdom and such, my argument is that because of globalization, it isn't necessary to take the "traditional" path to a decent society, which seems to be painted as a thousand years of misery followed by a hundred years of prosperity.
i'd be curious to hear the response to the argument about world resources not supporting countries that industrialized in the same manner in the US or Western Europe.
Originally posted by progmac
there seems to be some confusion as to what the anti-worker exploitation crowd wants...it is that labor not be completely at the mercy of their employer
I agree. That would be slavery. Freedom is vital for economic development...freedom in employment is part of that equation for sure.
Originally posted by progmac
you say this is impossible
Wooaaaa! I don't think I ever said that.
Originally posted by progmac
i'd be curious to hear the response to the argument about world resources not supporting countries that industrialized in the same manner in the US or Western Europe.
Well, I'd be curious about some citations to show what that means. The phrase "world resources" is broad and vague, and the phrase "not supporting countries that industrialized in the same manner in the US or Western Europe" isn't much more precise.