It's been a while since I wrote about this topic, but unfortunately, the issue isn't likely to go away anytime soon.
The most important takeaway message here is that closing the sweatshops doesn't do anything to address the poverty of the workers.
Like Mike Munger said about blocking voluntary exchanges that are not euvoluntary, people who try to thwart these helpful agreements are merely objecting to the situation itself. They believe no one should have to work in a sweatshop. I wish that were the case, but taking away their jobs doesn't make them any richer. Instead, it hurts the very people the activists are so concerned about.
Friday, June 8, 2012
Sweatshops make the world a better place
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Eh? I would think that any genuine solution to the problem would involve addressing circumstances extending beyond the present conditions. I think the conservative position misrepresents what the activists are actually advocating. Who's so narrow-minded as to think the problem dissipates the moment the sweatshop's closed down?
ReplyDeleteIronically, the conservative (specifically right-libertarian) position addresses the issue with the same narrow approach, albeit of course from a polar perspective.
Which is merely to remain complacent and allow exploited laborers to continue toiling in their present miserable conditions. This answer, too, does nothing to solve the problem of sweatshop labor. Assuming that this is actually presented as a solution rather than stating the obvious.