Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later[^][v]#101,090
I know you're probably a troll, but I agree with you. Eliminating sweatshops is not the solution.
Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 38 minutes after the original post[^][v]#101,096
You're actually right, and there is a mountain of evidence to support your view. Fact is sweatshops help out the entire local economy and eventually it develops to a point where it is no longer very profitable to run a sweatshop in that location, so they set up shop elsewhere and repeat the process.
Sweatshops: developing 3rd world cities since the industrial revolution.
(Edited 59 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#101,122
@101,090 (C)
No, not a troll. Those sweatshops are helping people out. The money can be reinvested into the workers, and their children and advance the region. Tolls can be bought with the wages, and then used to start a trade.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#101,123
@previous (A)
Not in every case, though. What do you make of the African rubber factories where children stop going to school and the pregnant mother comes into the factory to help the father produce as much rubber as possible? Less education doesn't help anyone out.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#101,126
@previous (C)
The pregnancy, and the child born into an impoverished family are the big issues here. Education, and condoms would help.
Child labor laws would be good, and mandated education would be nice too.
But if we just closed down the sweatshop, or if people boycotted the company operating it to force it to shut down, it would just cause more problems. Starving and malnourished people are just going to be worse off.
psychopath !PAHVpsycho joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#101,127
@101,123 (C)
Well, it's certainly far better than throwing money at the problem like the many guilt-Charities in Africa.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#101,129
@101,126 (A)
But the problem is companies start up sweat shops in those areas because of the lack of child labor laws, minimum wage laws, and mandatory education. So what do you propose?
psychopath !PAHVpsycho replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#101,130
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Nothing. They are a necessary evil compared to subsistence farming and prostitution.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#101,134
@previous (psychopath !PAHVpsycho)
How are subsistence farming and prostitution worse?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#101,140
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Subsistence farming means you live in a very unstable life. If you are unlucky and the weather is bad, or a disease hits your crops, you starve. You don't make enough to sell, so you can't visit the market, can't buy tools, can't educate yourself, can't get new clothing, etc. etc. You have very little, and when it's gone, it's hard to get it back.
A seatshop worker can advance. With time they can lead better lives, they have at least a chance.
And seriously? How is prostitution worse? The humiliation, the abuse, the diseases, possibly becoming enslaved to a pimp. Obviously this is not something anyone should have to go through.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#101,143
@101,134 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Neither one of those develop an economy nor spur trading. Sweatshops do. Its hard to accept sweatshops are a good thing, but in the vast majority of cases they really are.