“Inequality, conflict, and regulatory corruption are all part and parcel of capitalism, history has borne this out numerous times unless someone steps in to break them up, monopolies are the natural result of unbridled capitalism.” Author John Perkins, also known as the ‘economic hitman’ describes his role as a highly paid professional who helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the world out of trillions of dollars by providing them more money in which they could not pay back and later, taking over their economies in exchange of natural resources such as oil. In the epilogue of his book “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” he expresses his thoughts on taking ownership and changing the system by avoiding products that were manufactured by overworked laborers by developing boycotts to end labor standards and the promotion of it. Even though their is obvious economic growth in the U.S., Grassroots boycott can affect the policies of multinational corporations by avoiding products that are made by mistreated workers and help reduce self-destruction of the overall global empire because people who live in poverty do not benefit from a “voluntary trade,” the ecosystem is dying out, and greed is built in the system of the third world.
First, Grassroots boycotts can affect the strategies of multinational corporations by avoiding products that are made from exploited workers; Helping the reduction of self-destruction of our planet economically in which they can include the poor by having a benefit from a voluntary trade. Those living in poverty have few options and must embrace any deal that keeps them from the point of starvation. While the rich have many options and can choose those that’ll increase their profit rate, in other words...
... middle of paper ...
.... Perkins believes people should protest against companies that exploit desperate people in sweatshops, demonstrating equality amongst people of different classes.
Indeed, while there is conspicuous economic gain in the U.S., grassroots boycott can affect the approach of multinational corporations by eschewing products that are made by exploited workers and avail reduce self-eradication of the overall global imperil. These acts John Perkins presented, which include: cutting back on shopping and oil consumption,seek truth in every government related topic, and the awareness of products that weren’t made here in the U.S. Through the purchases you make everyday, a consumer creates an economy where child labor and sweatshops cease to exist, also having the power to influence and control great companies. After all: why not join the movement in creating a better system?
The controversial issue of sweatshops is one often over looked by The United States. In the Social Issues Encyclopedia, entry # 167, Matt Zwolinski tackles the issues of sweatshops. In this article Matt raises a question I have not been able to get out of my head since I have begun researching this topic, “ are companies who contract with sweatshops doing anything wrong?” this article goes on to argue that the people who work in the sweatshops willingly choose to work there, despite the poor environment. Many people in third world countries depend on the sweatshops to earn what they can to have any hopes of surviving. If the sweatshops were to shut down many people would lose their jobs, and therefore have no source of income. This may lead people to steal and prostitution as well. this article is suggesting that sweatshops will better the economy by giving people a better job than what they may have had. Due to this the companies contracting with sweatshops are not acting wrong in any way. This was a deductive article it had a lot of good examples to show how sweatshops are beneficial to third world countries. Radly Balko seemed to have the same view point as Matt Zwolinski. Many people believe the richer countries should not support the sweatshops Balko believes if people stopped buying products made in sweatshops the companies will have to shut down and relocate, firing all of the present workers. Rasing the fact that again the worker will have no source of income, the workers need the sweatshop to survive. Balko also uses the argument that the workers willingly work in the current environments.
The concept of discrimination is complex in the case of “The Big One” in this case, corporations in the United States of America such as Nike, Spalding, Microsoft and AT&T are not willing to change their ways of manufacturing their goods in third world countries and American detention centres, and this causes perfectly able bodied employees in the United States to become unemployed as more and more companies apply this measure to make additional profit for themsel...
James B. Weaver illustrates the true damage of monopolies on the public in “A Call to Action” (Document 4). Weaver, a two-time candidate for president of the United States, addresses the meticulous tactics which trusts and monopolies use to increase their profit at the expense of the public and asserts that their main weapons are, ”threats, intimidation, bribery, fraud, wreck, and pillage.” Arguments such as Weaver’s, suggest and end to the end of the laissez-faire capitalism that monopolies are sustained upon. Laissez-faire capitalism is essentially a system where the government takes no position in the affairs of businesses and does not interfere, no matter what harm is being done. This ideology dominated the business world of the century and allowed for vast unemployment, low wages, and impoverishment. Soon, laborers also begin to express their dismay with the way that such businesses are run and the treatment of workers in the railroad industry. An instance of this being the Pullman Strike of 1894. In 1894, laborers went on a nationwide strike against the Pullman Company; they issued a statement regarding their strike in June (Document 6). Workers are repulsed by Pullman’s exertion of power over several institutions and how his greed affects his competitors, who must reduce their wages to keep up with his businesses. This incident inspires many to take
The mere idea of sweatshops, let alone their existence, seems cruel and unusual to people like us, especially in today's day and age. After all, in sweatshops "workers are subject to extreme exploitation. This includes... (not) enabling workers to cover ...
He inquires, “Isn’t it a little presumptuous of us to think that we can end sweatshop abuses by just changing our individual buying habits?” (“Sweat, Fire, and Ethics). As Jeffcott provides the reader with the entirety of the background information on the Fairtrade-certification, he enables the reader to realize what really needs to be done in order to end the use of sweatshops. Another ineffective strategy that Jeffcott mentions is when society attempts to exert the guilt towards large brand name companies, as these companies only address these issues to the extent which it will not affect their productivity. Jeffcott explains that, “Conflicting pressures make suppliers hide abuses or subcontract to sewing workshops...The name of the game remains the same: more work for less pay” (“Sweat, Fire, and Ethics”). By clarifying how ineffective people’s current efforts are in influencing the abuse in sweatshops, Jeffcott challenges the reader to assess if their own efforts are sufficient for the cause. Jeffcott then concludes his argument by proposing to the reader to exceed traditional means of resistance to sweatshops by urging the government to intervene on these reprehensible practices, and perhaps then a solution may be achieved. Contrarily, Jeffrey D. Sachs argues in his excerpt “Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development,” that despite the injustice that
Bob Jeffcott supports the effort of workers of the global supply chains in order to win improved wages and good working conditions and a better quality of life of those who work on sweatshops. He mentions and describes in detail how the conditions of the sweatshops are and how the people working in them are forced to long working hours for little money. He makes the question, “we think we can end sweatshops abuses by just changing our individual buying habits?” referring to we can’t end the abuses that those women have by just stopping of buying their products because those women still have to work those long hours because other people are buying their product for less pay or less money. We can’t control and tell what you can buy or what you can’t because that’s up to the person...
When 15,000 workers walk out of a factory in one day and start a picket line, it’s bound to catch the interest of the press. But when the strike lasts for 14 weeks and shuts down a shirtwaist plant, they mean business. Especially when the strike, lead by all women in the early 1900s, something completely unheard of. In the 1910s women had about as many rights as blacks did, and though they had “freedom” they were discriminated by color all the same. At the start of an industrial revolution immigration to the cities was colossal, many people lived in ghettos and learned that good, well paying jobs were often hard to find. Low income meant that large families had a hard time paying their bills. No money to pay the bills lead to women and children dropping out of school and going to work in large overcrowded factories. When the heat and the pressure of large amounts of work and not enough pay became too much for them they decided to revolt. While women were arrested and sent to workhouses slowing progression, the Uprising of the 20,000 improved working conditions for sweatshop workers and proved women could make a difference in a man’s world.
...ng this simplistic definition of capitalism which means that there will be “winners” and “losers” to this relationship. The focus upon the “bottom line” leaves little to no room for the consideration of social consequences such as unemployment and poverty. The disconnection that capitalism creates enables itself to flourish thus limiting the potential to achieve socio-economic justice. Fundamentally changing the way capitalism operates requires a political shift in power dynamics. Consumers who do play a role in how the economy is structured are needed to be brought back to consciousness by demanding justice.
With means of production becoming more efficient due to the introduction of modernization and technology, workers jobs begin being replaced by machines. No longer is the laborer’s skill of any value to the capitalist, especially, when the worker can be replaced by a more affordable machine, or when they can be replaced by the exploitation of another countries’ cheaper laborers or resources. With capitalism main objective being profit at whatever means possible; we see that one nation isn’t enough to contain this destructive force, so it stretching across the globe. When the differences of age, sex, race, nationality, gender and any other distinctive social validity, the sobering consequence develops the very demise of the capitalists and creates an untamable globalized chaos caused by the force of productions and the greed of the
Sweatshops are factories that violate two or more human rights. Sweatshops are known in the media and politically as dangerous places for workers to work in and are infamous for paying minimum wages for long hours of labour. The first source is a quote that states that Nike has helped improve Vietnamese’s’ workers lives by helping them be able to afford luxuries they did not have access to before such as scooters, bicycles and even cars. The source is showing sweatshops in a positive light stating how before sweatshops were established in developing countries, Vietnamese citizens were very poor and underprivileged. The source continues to say that the moment when sweatshops came to Vietnam, workers started to get more profit and their lives eventually went uphill from their due to being able to afford more necessities and luxuries; one of them being a vehicle, which makes their commute to work much faster which in turn increases their quality of life. The source demonstrates this point by mentioning that this is all due to globalization. Because of globalization, multinationals are able to make investments in developing countries which in turn offers the sweatshops and the employees better technology, better working skills and an improvement in their education which overall helps raise the sweatshops’ productivity which results in an increase
Ravisankar concludes his expository essay by informing his audience about organizations like the University Students Against Sweatshops who are forcing corporations to source their clothes from respectful factories or they will not purchase their products.
I decided to write about the Economic Hitman because I was drawn to the quote "Dedicated to transforming the world into a sustainable, just and peaceful home where all beings can thrive" by John Perkins, an American author and economist. Perkins claims to have played a role in the economic establishment of Third World countries on behalf of a section of the United States government. His best-known book, Confessions of an Economic Hitman, was published in 2004. Perkins worked directly with the World Bank, IMF, and many other global financial institutions and corporations, but he was one of the economic hitmen. According to Perkins, he was a highly paid professional who cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars.
Linda Lim, a professor at the University of Michigan Business School, visited Vietnam and Indonesia in the summer of 2000 to obtain first-hand research on the impact of foreign-owned export factories (sweatshops) on the local economies. Lim found that in general, sweatshops pay above-average wages and conditions are no worse than the general alternatives: subsistence farming, domestic services, casual manual labor, prostitution, or unemployment. In the case of Vietnam in 1999, the minimum annual salary was 134 U.S. dollars while Nike workers in that country earned 670 U.S. dollars, the case is also the similar in Indonesia. Many times people in these countries are very surprised when they hear that American's boycott buying clothes that they make in the sweatshops. The simplest way to help many of these poor people that have to work in the sweatshops to support themselves and their families, would be to buy more products produced in the very sweatshops they detest.
Christopoulos, D. (2007). “The problem with sweatshops is that there are not enough of them” . Hamilton Institute Weekly. Retrieved from www.hamiltoninstitute.com/index.php?option=com_content&task
Shah, A. (2006, May 28). Corporations and Worker's Rights. - Global Issues. Retrieved April 21, 2014, from http://www.globalissues.org/article/57/corporations-and-workers-rights