Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (7972)	2/3/2012 1:46:28 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

I am very happy that the poor of the world are doing better. But it is not OK to give a starving person a sweatshop and say: "well that was better than nothing). yes, clearly it's much better to let them starve....<eye roll> you are proving my point about "good intentions" with the complete failure to accomplish what you expect.

To: koan who wrote (7972)	2/3/2012 1:52:38 PM
From: TimF	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Again the sweatshop job is an improvement, often a big improvement, over what they had before. To us its a "sweatshop" since we are used to much better, we have infrastructure and capital that they don't have. To them its a "good job", and your trying to get them fired. And its not just an improvement in the present, it helps drive improvement in the future. As the economies of very poor countries gain more workers with some skills, gain more money, more physical capital, more knowledge about and access to the world market, conditions improve. It happened here and in Europe, we went through this stage, and on to better things. You apparently want to short circuit the development, because they can't jump right away to what you consider good enough.