| IcaroRibeiro said: You don't sound upset, but I'm upset (or at least I'm just as upset) because your reasoning is implying poor countries themselves are the source of their own poverty, when in reality our poverty is much more a byproduct of an global economic system who demand the least industrialized countries to submit themselves into a subservience regime for companies born in richer countries at least until those poorer countries manage to produce their own source of wealth A very good instance of this in South Korea they are rich now, but it comes at the cost of very low salaries to their citizens during the 60's, 70's, 80's and even 90's Trying to explain better: Poor countries have no choice but keep wages low and remove taxes from big industries/companies with they want those industries to stabilish and create jobs in their countries, otherwise those same companies would just go away and find an even poorer country to explore cheap labor You step trying to paint China (and every third world country) as the responsible for low salaries when in reality we have no choice but accept lower salaries THE INTERNATIONAL MARKET IMPOSE TO US if we want any chance to see foreign industries here. As we can't grown our own competitive industries, at least not when we still poor Need to point that China is another thing that I despise entirely: A borderline dictatorship where citizens have almost no saying whatever economic policy state decides. Still, I understand what lead the state to make their citizens cheap labour as the country was under poverty line in the 80's they made desperate decisions to lead economy growth, but they were not responsible bu the low income of their citizens and their citizens were already low income in first place China now has enough money and their own local humungous corporations, so they can afford working on better working laws, but since we are talking about a fucking dictatorship those spcial advances will come much slower than in other east asian countries |
No one is"IMPOSING" anything on anyone. Lets make this simple...
As a company, you want to make your product at the lowest possible price. This improves your profits and also give you a competitive advantage. This means that you would seek out countries that have the infrastructure to make your products, while also costing you less. So you are no gong to make your stuffing NA/UK...etc because the minimum-wage there is very high. So you find somewhere that its cheaper. Don't forget, doing this also means that those high minimum-wage countries lose out on the job having such a manufacturing plant would have brought.
So say I am sony. I want to manufacture the PS5. I have two options, I use an assembly company in NA and each unit costs me $100 to make. Or I use a company in china, and each unit cost me $20 make. Now mind you, there is also MS, they are also making consoles too, and they are faced with the exact same dilemma. I am not the one that sets what the company in china pays its workers, that company is just giving me an option.
Its a simple math problem at this point.As far as me being a company is concerned.
It simply is NOT my business how that company is able to give me such low manufacturing rates. All I care for is that its legal. If they raise their prices too high, and it costs me more or just as much to make the products in my own country? Then where do you think I would make them? And you think the countries that keep their minimum wage low but invest heavily in infrastructure doesn't know this?
You are asking companies to do what? Not compete because they want to force governments to change their labor laws? Seriously?
Ok..how about this... if you walk into store. And you see two IDENTICAL PS5 consoles. Identical in every way. But one costs $499 and the other cost $599. With the only difference being that one is said to be made in china and the other is said to be made in the USA... which of those two SKUs do you think will sell more? And that right there is the hypocrisy in arguments like these.
And again, I am not saying the labor laws are good. But I am saying that in an open market, companies would always find the best and most cost-effective ways to bring their products to market. And it is not on them to change labor laws. And the countries that have the infrastructure to make these products for these companies, don't change their labor laws because they want to continue receiving business from those companies as they know that if they do,those companies would just go to somewhere else.
