At 12:30 AM 1/27/01 +1100, Autarch (really, now) wrote:
>>I strongly suspect you understand wrong. Workers in even the worst
>>manufacturing environments in the developing world, are usually earning
>>more than the $1 a day of the unemployed or workers in subsistence
>>agriculture.
>
>Hmm. I'd have to share your suspicion, but with you as the subject. :)
>I'll have to investigate, but I suspect there are a great number of
>developing world workers who must have their entire family work to provide
>base minimum sustenance. Instead of arguing the point, I'll have to go away
>and dig up so facts and figures. I'll get back to you on this point.
You misunderstand. They very well may have to do just that. I am just
saying that this job is almost certainly better than their next best
alternative. (If it wasn't, why would they work?)
>So, Michael Jordan's endorsement is worth in the vicinity of 200 US per
>pair of sneakers? OK, that was facetious, but I still don't believe that
>the product is so close to margin that they don't have enough money to
>employ a local workforce. I realise that I make that assertion without
>giving reason, so let me do so.
Of course not. You and I don't wear Air Jordan's. (As an aside to
another poster - only a portion of Nike's sneakers are the exorbitantly
priced "Air Jordans.") Millions or Americans, however, disagree with you
and I. That's freedom.
>Why should a company employ a local workforce above moving operations to a
>cheaper locale. I believe it was Henry Ford who first paid his workers a
>much higher wage than his competitors - to the net benefit of his own
>business.
Yeah...... and he was running one of those evil corporations too, wasn't he?
>> Workers from developing countries veyr often can't compete
>>with these workers.
>
>Less productive and reliable? I won't accept that. You're going to have to
>define what you mean.
I mean exactly that. Workers in developing countries are notoriously less
productive and less reliable than American workers. Ask anyone in
international business.
>This is the probelm. The companies involved *aren't* acting altruistically
>- and this is *fact*. If they were, they would be investing far more in
>local wages, and environmental and other safety standards. Seriously, what
>would be the cost for a company to *double* the average wage in such a
>situation? It would still be far cheaper than a developed world plant - and
>it would begin to have the effects you describe. Furthermore, no-one would
>be decrying them as the "villain of the week"
Except for the fact that they would quickly go out of business because
their rival down the street only has half of the labor costs that they do.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Never tiring, never yielding, never finishing, we renew that purpose today:
to make our country more just and generous; to affirm the dignity of
our lives and every life." - George W. Bush Inaugural Address 1/20/01
