ercarter2 Author

The article, In Defense of “Sweatshops’, by Benjamin Powell, argues that as Americans, we would not want to work hard for low pay. Working in a sweatshop is not acceptable for us; however, it is okay to do this in other countries, with the focus being on third world countries. The cost of living is very low, and he believes that the wages made from American companies is adequate to live on comfortably. He describes the 15-year-old girl coming on a television show interview to talk about working conditions in 1996 when Kathy Lee Gifford’s clothing company was accused of using child labor to manufacture her merchandise. Gifford cried and apologized which lead to higher wages for her worker’s. The article states that the people in Honduras typically made $1.00 to $2.00 per day, and Gifford’s workers made over $3.00, so that made it okay in his mind. The author says that an alternative to sweatshops is that people, including children, go into prostitution; his argument says that sweatshops are preferable. He says that if the companies paid too much, it would not be cost effective for their company and people would lose their jobs. Powell states toward the end of the article that it takes time to raise living standards in a third world country, so in the meantime, he justifies sweatshops as being the best path.

I would argue that if the parents of these children that are forced into prostitution made enough money, then the kids wouldn’t have to do that. If the parents made enough money on their jobs to live comfortably, not sweatshop wages, then the children would not have to work at all, they could attend school and possibly do something else with their lives. There is no hope for a future other than being a factory worker. I think that when we are of the mindset that sweatshops are okay in other countries, then when sweatshops are found on US soil, people are not appalled enough to demand change. Powell’s arguments do not work for American sweatshops, because those wages here cannot support an individual or family. When sweatshops are found and broken up here, human trafficking is always behind it. People are commonly brought to the US from other countries with the promise of work, only to become enslaved to either work in a hidden factory or as prostitutes.

In an article entitled Sweatshops, they argue that working conditions are typically unsafe, there are not enough rest periods for workers, they work long hours such as sixteen-hour days, and can suffer the abuse of bosses including sexual abuse. Anti-sweatshop activism came to the forefront in the 1990’s when people discovered that the merchandise they wear was most likely made from child labor. They created enough press which forced large American companies to monitor their overseas factories. Even when terms for workers were agreed upon, China broke the rules to cover up worker abuse. Considering that, how effective are the standards that are put into place by companies such as Walmart? If workers in sweatshops are paid more money, then that would drive up retail prices for things we want to buy. It boils down to what do most Americans want more, inexpensive merchandise or humane treatment for other human beings? Although some progress has been made by a few large corporations, the way we consume, it looks like the ability to acquire inexpensive merchandise is winning, for now anyway.

Sources:

Benjamin Powell. “In Defense of “Sweatshops’.’ June 2, 2008. Library of Economics and Liberty. Retrieved February 14, 2018 from the World Wide Web: https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2008/Powellsweatshops.html

“Sweatshops.’ Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2014. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, https://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/PC3021900163/OVIC?u=p1841&xid=f48457d3. Accessed 13 Feb. 2018.

Benjamin Powell’s article, In Defense of “Sweatshops,’ is a non biased argument that ultimately ends with sweatshops being defended. The premise of his argument states that sweatshops provide a better alternative to many other forms of labor. In defense of this argument, Powell provides some interesting statistical information that sheds some light on sweatshop workers. The data Powell provides shows sweatshop workers often earn more than the average wage for their countries, provides income for individuals who would otherwise have no source of income and provides a better alternative to other forms of work such as prostitution. Powell also provides real world examples from the data collected and used in his argument. The data and real world examples used are compelling, however it’s still difficult to morally justify the working conditions these laborers are subjected to.

I will argue sweatshops as they are now are morally wrong and that there are alternatives to them. In order to do this, let’s take a look at one of Powell’s arguments. Powell’s argument gave an example of the factory in Bangladesh which laid off 50,000 children who then experienced worse living conditions. I will argue the point that poor working conditions in sweatshops are a negative externality to the cheap product prices we enjoy. Competition has driven prices down the equilibrium price of goods to be so low that factories have a difficult time paying employees a higher wage. When we go to Walmart and buy a new $5 shirt made in Vietnam we probably don’t think about who made the shirt, it was $5 so whatever right? Well, in order to make that shirt $5, other people likely suffered some pretty horrible working conditions.

How could the problem of sweatshops be remedied? I believe the answer lies in big business, politics, and most importantly the global community. Large conglomerates could help this situation by paying more for the goods they purchase, this however will likely not happen on its own. Politics can also prove to be a source of change, weather it be good or bad, solid political rulings could potentially help working conditions in third world factories. In the end, consumers and activists will likely have to bring awareness to the problem of sweatshops and bring about change that large conglomerates will respond to.

 

Source:

“Sweatshops.” Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2014. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, https://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/PC3021900163/OVIC?u=p1841&xid=f48457d3. Accessed 18 Feb. 2018.

Personal ethical positions are made by in part by our experiences and surroundings as well as the instinctual knowledge inherent in humans. We as the human race are “programmed’ to want to survive, reproduce and further our species. In order to achieve this goal as the human race we have a set of codes to follow which help us define what we should and should not do. To a degree we all have an inherent ethical baseline, however the effects of our environment and surroundings also help guide our ethical positions.

As our civilization expands and cultures rise and fall we continue to change our ethical positions to fit what is right and wrong and to fit with what is or isn’t socially acceptable. The definition of what is right and wrong changes over time to adapt to society and externalities that come into play. For example people who drive combustion engine cars but are also environmentally conscience have a negative externality to deal with. The negative externality of driving is pollution, however this isn’t currently considered ethically wrong and the benefit probably outweighs the cost of using alternative more eco-friendly transportation. We are starting to see more changes to help our environment and generations down the road public pollution may very well be considered a ethically wrong.

Environment, experiences and human instinct help us develop and refine our ethical positions as we age individually and as a society. In the end humans achieve ever changing ethical positions to meet the societal expectations.