Are sweatshops ethical to buy from?

[iirtriiiokn]

Are sweatshops ethical to buy from? I think they are because they create jobs for people, and people have a choice whether or not to work there, but a lot of people say it's bad to buy from sweatshops so maybe I'm wrong, so before I buy from aliexpress again I want to hear some opinions from here.

[Jebus]

Are sweatshops ethical to buy from?

Yes

I think they are because they create jobs for people, and people have a choice whether or not to work there

Correct. If we stop buying such products these factories will have to be shut down and the people will be even worse off.

[NonZeroSum]

Are sweatshops ethical to buy from? I think they are because they create jobs for people, and people have a choice whether or not to work there, but a lot of people say it's bad to buy from sweatshops so maybe I'm wrong, so before I buy from aliexpress again I want to hear some opinions from here.

It's a non-ethical question for me, any work where you have no other option for food and healthcare is slavery, buy, don't buy, people suffer, there is no choice for the consumer, hence no reason to boycott, but there is a need for transparency to shame companies to pay a fairer share, and for the country into improving it's tax, welfare and infrastructure development.

The term sweatshops will always be synonymous with failure, an unequal exchange in trade, sweatshop conditions appear in developed countries and developing alike.

[Jebus]

there is no choice for the consumer

???

buy, don't buy, people suffer,

There are different degrees of suffering. Compare having a boring job with shitty work conditions to starving and watching your family members starve. If people don't buy many won't have money for food. Hence, whether you buy or don't buy does have consequences.

[NonZeroSum]

there is no choice for the consumer

???

Animal products are relatively easy to spot and avoid buying, clothing would be more difficult to research every item before you buy, there are likely products you could send a message to, in the case of workers striking or something, but I agree that people shouldn't revolve their lifestyle around not consuming something which is a really morally grey area, hence no choice.

Mexican Labour Protest Gets Results
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/08/world/mexican-labor-protest-gets-results.html

buy, don't buy, people suffer,

There are different degrees of suffering. Compare having a boring job with shitty work conditions to starving and watching your family members starve. If people don't buy many won't have money for food. Hence, whether you buy or don't buy does have consequences.

I was referring to being green about only buying from thrift stores when there is an overabundance of textiles, it being a super sinister situation where third world countries economies are relying on the over consumption of rich ones, and the unequal trade in goods.

[brimstoneSalad]

I would say it is a moral imperative TO buy sweatshop produced goods, because those people need the jobs so badly. That is, if we're concerned with human beings.

If you have a "made in USA (or whatever)" product vs. one made in a poorer country and probably in a sweatshop, and they cost about the same, choose the latter to help more people who need it most.

but there is a need for transparency to shame companies to pay a fairer share, and for the country into improving it's tax, welfare and infrastructure development.

I think it's down to the country, not the company, but they're both in competition (countries compete with each other, so it's really down to the country importing these goods).
Companies are in competition with each other, and if one is offering a grossly inflated salary in a poorer country that's going to cause problems in the labor market, and could have some really bad unintended consequences.
If you and your cousin are both applying for one of these dream jobs that offers dozens of times the wage for the same work, and you hear your cousin got the job, you might be VERY motivated to ensure he doesn't show up to work the next day so they'll move on to you.
I'm saying people might literally murder each other over these jobs.
The same applies to the hyper-competitive workplace and the desire to keep the job. Somebody sees you steal something and you might get fired? Kill them. No witness, you can't lose this job, because the others available are so much worse.

I'm very much in favor of things like accident insurance, but that has to be on the country level so it's an even playing field.

The biggest problem in some of these regions is wage theft, where people work and then get short changed when it comes time for pay. I think that's what we need to work on ending, so there's transparency for the workers and they always get what they're promised. Because these governments are so bad at enforcement, that might be a place for shaming companies.

[NonZeroSum]

but there is a need for transparency to shame companies to pay a fairer share, and for the country into improving it's tax, welfare and infrastructure development.

I think it's down to the country, not the company, but they're both in competition (countries compete with each other, so it's really down to the country importing these goods).
Companies are in competition with each other, and if one is offering a grossly inflated salary in a poorer country that's going to cause problems in the labor market, and could have some really bad unintended consequences.
If you and your cousin are both applying for one of these dream jobs that offers dozens of times the wage for the same work, and you hear your cousin got the job, you might be VERY motivated to ensure he doesn't show up to work the next day so they'll move on to you.
I'm saying people might literally murder each other over these jobs.
The same applies to the hyper-competitive workplace and the desire to keep the job. Somebody sees you steal something and you might get fired? Kill them. No witness, you can't lose this job, because the others available are so much worse.

I don't know how likely your first example is, but regardless I don't see any merit in having one industry you can make disproportionate amount of money in either, in Cuba the people who drive tourists around in those classic cars get paid more than doctors. If the workers are paid just over the average so that they can support their kids to get a decent education that makes sense. Most important is investment in the community and infrastructure for health and safety, whenever a fire and building collapse happens in Bangladesh making clothing for wall-mart, they are always able to skirt blame by having 10 intermediaries who worked as agents sourcing the clothes, that's wrong, they created the demand with a race to rock-bottom prices and their clothing designs are on the factory floor.

[brimstoneSalad]

[...]infrastructure for health and safety, whenever a fire and building collapse happens in Bangladesh making clothing for wall-mart, they are always able to skirt blame by having 10 intermediaries who worked as agents sourcing the clothes, that's wrong, they created the demand with a race to rock-bottom prices and their clothing designs are on the factory floor.

I agree with this. It's hard to consent to that kind of risk; people are very bad at risk assessment.

[BernieBro420]

Chapter 8 of MacAskill's "Doing Good Better" is about this, but I'm currently streaming the Phish show. I'll pull it up in a few.