Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
P is for Practical
 
PerlMonks  

Re^7: You have a point... :-)

by BerntB (Deacon)
on Sep 08, 2005 at 01:19 UTC ( #490054=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^6: When are you moving to India to find a better job?
in thread When are you moving to India to find a better job?

because a broken leg should be the same all over the world.
The Western world should be upset about the unfair competition ... keeping taxes low by not having a public health system. Private health care is probably more effective but causes unnecessary suffering to people not covered by it. Those low taxes results in higher investments.

US use this totally inhuman treatment of many workers to outcompete Europe and Canada!

(The above is a bit tounge-in-cheek. The US health care system is fscked, but so is my local Swedish public system. :-( )

Seriously, you have no sense of history.

The workers at many of those factories probably have better health care then the rest of the working population of that country.

If you want to argue, give good references showing why the economists are wrong, who argue that those factory jobs (etc) better the economy and people's life in all of Asia.

It was less than a century we had child workers in the west. Human rights for women isn't exactly new, either.


Comment on Re^7: You have a point... :-)
Re^8: You have a point... :-)
by polettix (Vicar) on Sep 08, 2005 at 01:53 UTC
    Maybe you missed my original node. I'm not talking about public health system. I'm talking about corporations that go overseas because they can find a work regulation more forgiving than that in their home country. Because they can make the good and the bad time there, but not at home. Because they are bound to guarantee lower security standards - this is why I was talking about a broken leg.

    This does not mean that they shouldn't invest overseas. What I find unfair is that their gain arises from worker's weaker position (with respect home workers). I accept the argument from merlyn about payment, as I said; I don't accept that this is not sufficient, and that more gains are done on looser safety and guarantees.

    You say I have no sense of history. You're probably right, but I see here in Italy that years of working rights are being sacrificed in the name of "work flexibility", while capitals tend to concentrate in the hands of few and people suffers for increased poverty and less stability - which is a big step back IMO. And if this happens here, I fear that better conditions will never happen there: it's us that are adapting to their lower standard, not the contrary.

    It was less than a century we had child workers in the west. Human rights for women isn't exactly new, either.
    So what? Are you implying we should step back in the west? Or that this path will be the natural one for the east in the next years? This only means that they can't have easy slaves in the west, and they go looking in the third and fourth world. And this is history since the night of times.

    Flavio
    perl -ple'$_=reverse' <<<ti.xittelop@oivalf

    Don't fool yourself.
      I'm not talking about public health system.
      Yeah, I just pointed out that you could argue that e.g. USA's health care system is lower standards than the European. Your argument is relevant here, too. As I wrote -- tounge in cheek.

      I don't exactly like the work market, either. But...

      My real points was that (a) those factories often have higher standards than the alternative work places overseas and (b) the consensus among economists seems to be that this is part of the only ladder to prosperity that has worked, historically. We in the West climbed something similar in the 19th century.

      Now, given those two points -- can you contradict them with good references or are you really complaining anyway?

        Sorry I don't have the references you urge to have - but I maybe don't need them, because we're not saying things that are at opposite sided. Moreover, I note that you tend to ask for references without giving ones, which does not seem fair this second time.

        I've tried to be clear that the regulation should encourage higher life standards, and not only lower costs for corporations.

        those factories often have higher standards than the alternative work places overseas
        Often means not always, which is a pity. Regulation should strive to impose that products that are produced overseas with something resembling the standards one has at home, otherwise we're closing our eyes. Moreover, they can be higher than the other native work places (which is something that I would like to see evidence of), but my point was subtly different. What I want to say is that going overseas is a way to avoid to adhere to the standards one is imposed to follow at home, and this goes at the expense of workers overseas.
        the consensus among economists seems to be that this is part of the only ladder to prosperity that has worked, historically. We in the West climbed something similar in the 19th century.
        This is probably what you're looking for contradiction pointers from me. But the fact is that I don't want to contradict this. This might be what worked for the west in the 19th century, but I would also remember you that workers had to fight hard to reach what they have today (and that they are sadly losing). I also think that today the conditions are quite different with respect the 19th century, and I'm quite skeptical about the same path being followed in the third and fourth world. There is a precise interest in keeping them as they are.

        As I said, all this is not intended to be an arid complaining. I agree that there are win-win opportunities overseas for companies. What I don't agree is that there is not balance, and the weaker side gains something resembling a Pirro victory. Given the fact that our governments are so keen to spread freedom all over the world, I was wondering if it could be done in manners that were not only intended to give benefits to the army industry and the oil market.

        Flavio
        perl -ple'$_=reverse' <<<ti.xittelop@oivalf

        Don't fool yourself.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://490054]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (14)
As of 2014-07-28 17:38 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (204 votes), past polls