On Sunday, July 27, 2003, at 11:20 AM, James A. Donald wrote:
This is the same moron marxism as expressed in the word
"sweatshop": To a naive and ignorant socialist it seems that if
each man selfishly pursues his own desire, the result will
necessarily be chaos and hardship, that one person's plan will
naturally harm those that are not part of it, hence such
phrases and concepts as "sweatshop" which presuppose that one
man producing a plan to create value and another man providing
equipment to implement that plan, has somehow magically made
the workers in a poor country worse off, that saving,
investment and entrepeneurship is unproductive, that
investment, particularly investment by rich people creating the
means of production in poor countries, is a plot to swindle the
poor, a scam, a transfer from poor to rich.
\

The move to "boycott stores selling sweatshop products" is gathering steam, so to speak. Stores like The Gap, Old Navy, Target, etc. are making plans to stop buying from so-called sweatshops.


Of course, when this happens all those employed in these "sweatshops" in Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc. will be unemployed. What, do people think shutting down the garment factories means the workers will get jobs at Intel and Microsoft? Or that somehow their wages will be increased to economically-unsupported levels for their country/

Duh. I'll chortle as yuppies and GenXers may more for inferior clothing while millions in Bangladesh and Malaysia starve to death over this "save the poor people!" scam.

As for the standard of living issue, I _do_ think the standard of living has declined over the past 40 years, aside from some availability of high tech products and medical care. Most of my employed friends are working half again as many hours as my father worked, are spending twice as much time sitting in traffic, and are living in smaller houses than my parents and my family lived in. And they are paying several times the tax burden. If the wife works, which was rare in the 1950s and into the early 60s, and they have children, then they may be paying a further substantial hit on childcare and nannies.

I would not want interference to stop free transaction in jobs, but it's disingenuous to ignore the fact that many today are working two jobs, or very, very long hours, to maintain a house that is generally smaller than in years past.

(Yeah, there are are a lot of McMansions. But many engineers in their 30s are still living in crappy apartments. And working 50-hour weeks, at minimum, with hours per day spent sitting in traffic. And on call with cellphones and laptops. And taking work home. And checking their e-mail every night and weekend. And paying 50% or more of what they make in federal income taxes, state income taxes, passed-on property taxes, sales taxes, energy taxes, highway taxes, and Socialist Security taxes. And what they earn in investments, after paying taxes on income, is taxed a second time, even if the alleged investment gains are mostly due to monetary devaluation.)

You often let your intense hatred of Marxism blind you to the very horrific situation we now face.

--Tim May



Reply via email to