[China] Explotation of Chinese workers by American Corporation

Here is yet more information and more circumstances surrounding exploitatitve labour in China. Not surprising that the current American administration is not willing to do anything about it.

 

Actually I was responding to Matt, but the amount of evidence you have to support your case absolutely is an issue.

No they don't, where any credible information is presented at all it talks about a couple of cases of land dispute.

I'm mirroring your own rhetoric, you used the term first.

Nothing you've posted demonstrates your point about outsourcing being 'exploitative'.

I do understand what was written, but I don't think the source for 'living wage' is credible nor the analysis deep enough. If you don't understand why, go back to my original post about why the articles which just quote wages but not living costs aren't useful here.

If you think I'm glossing it over, ask yourself the following simple questions and answer them logically and honestly :-

1) If Nike isn't paying a 'living' wage, why are it's workers still alive ?(pretty obvious when you think about it)

2) What were they living on before, and why is the current job preferable ?

I've read the article and just understood the subtexts and logical fallacies better then you. You even posted an article talking about how the Bush administration had refused to sign a petition asking that Chinese factories be made to pay higher wages written in the indignant tone of a thwarted activist as some kind of proof.

You can't use an emotionally worded article which basically says 'Group X asked for higher wages and shorter working hours and didn't get it' as the basis of proof of exploitation.

Workers not getting what they ask for is not automatically a sign of exploitation.


Now stopping using that snooty roll-eyes smiley and do some real thinking.

 

Well then, I'd have to disagree. It was not what I'd DIRECTLY quoted. It wasn't Coke Cola that KILLED a village. It was more "villagers die of thirst as a result of Coke Cola owning local water resources". I only mentioned it as it appeared to me like you were sensationalising what I was saying and making it more emotive. That is something that you've complained about with regards to the "bleeding-heart-liberals".

Yes, I see what you're trying to say. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't take allegations seriously. I'd argue that perhaps both the situation and the resources availiable to gather enough evidence to take it to court is much more hindering in cases in the less economically "developed" world.

Yes, and I think I said that. But my point wasn't refering to prevention. Once it does leak (and it happens), companies have already lost the money. It is the clean up and cover up that I am criticising.

Actually, I never said anything about China. I was accusing multi-nationals of exploitation in general before the discussion moved more to China specifically. You never mentioned anything about me citing examples for my claims about China. How could you? I hadn't said anything about exploitation specific to China.

Actually, I was being ironic. You insinuated that I was a "liberal" who knew nothing about the world. In response, I insuniated that you were a die hard "capitalist" who knew nothing of the environmental limits that effect economic growth. My aim in doing so was to make you aware that neither of us can be so easily categorised, especially so stereotypically.

Morals are subjective, therefore, so is exploitation. I see your arguement, and I hope you see mine. Cheers for the discussion, it's interesting

 

Cullion,

Because of the start of classes I haven't been able to pull many links. I can point to the work of Aihwa Ong docmenting the treatment of female workers in "free enterprise" zones in Malaysia and Indonesia.

But what I'm curious about is understanding where you are coming from on something. My question is do you feel the following can be true?

Companies can exploit local workers (by violating existing local labor law or operating in commerce zones where labor laws don't exist) AND at the same time local workers economic situations are improving (at some rate).

I don't think this debate can move forward until that point is touched on.

I agree. Nor is that exploitation, as I have hopefully clearly explained. So, lets drop that part of the discussion.

- Matt

 

Fair enough. Here is my answer:-

I don't consider law-breaking automatically to be a form of exploitation. The laws may be unreasonable. I consider exploitation to occur when coercion occurs. I am narrow in my definition of coercion. I don't consider 'I have to take this damn job at the wage offered because nobody else opened a factory here yet' to be a form of coercion.

However coercion does exist. Forcing people off land they own with violence or the threat of it to build a corporate facility would be coercion, and as such would be exploitation.

I hold the view I do because confirmed examples of the latter type of 'exploitation' by western owned corporations are extremely rare amongst the literature cited by those who express a general disatissfaction with globalised capitalism. Actually much rarer than the same sort of abuses under the alternatives to capitalism.

 

A fair point. I don't think it matters what system of economics is in place though. Capitalism and communism aren't exploitative in theory. It is the human will to exploit people that is the problem.