Dear Diary(econ blogpost),
I am a bit distraught. Wheelan concluded Chapter 12 with a quote from Paul Krugman, which states that "the anti-globalization movement already has a remarkable track record of hurting the very people it causes it claims to champion." I agree, overall global trade benefits both parties tremendously, or else the trade would not occur in the first place. When jobs are outsourced to various countries it creates new jobs and helps to stimulate that country's economy. While being paid 2 dollars a day to make clothes in treacherous factory conditions is inconceivable to most Americans, it is a significant "step up" for many people who have even lower wages, or no job at all. The benefit to the worker is relative. But my argument, which I will get to, is not relating to wages. Working in a sweatshop is preferable to child prostitution, but that doesn't justify the conditions that many people are forced to work in. People, no matter the potential economic efficiency, should not have to work in an environment that is unsafe to their health. I don't think that's a creation of my naive idealism, but a basic respect for human life. If a company feels it must compromise the basic safety of its workers over the production of tennis shoes, then their perceived interest should be re-evaluated. An individual's freedom to work or not work at a dangerous factory does not eliminate the dire need for safety. Okay, that's all!
Yours Truly,
Caroline
No comments:
Post a Comment