Sweatshops: Economical Vs. Ethical

Since the rise of globalization and the introduction of offshoring/outsourcing, sweatshops have been an ethical issue in question. In these “sweatshops”, workers slave away for long hours in unsafe work conditions and are paid little in the end. Yet these same sweatshops also employ millions of men, women, and yes—children, drastically improving the economies in the countries they exist in. Sweatshops are a bittersweet necessity for the developing countries of the world, however, it is unethical for corporations to take advantage of the cheap and convenient labor in sweatshops to produce their products on the basis of economic need. As sweatshops are necessary yet unethical, it is imperative that they are rehabilitated over time rather than

Trusts, or large monopolies, were corporations that combined and lowered their prices to drive competitors out of the business. This infuriated many americans at that time because it allowed such a small number of people to become wealthy, or even successful at all. When Theodore Roosevelt became president, he sympathized with workers unlike most of the presidents in the past who usually tried to help the corporations. As illustrated in Document A, Roosevelt wanted to hunt down the bad trusts ad put a leash on the good ones in order to regulate them. However, it only had a limited effect because the government was unable to control the activity of banks and railroads which were two of the most powerful industries in the world.

Although the condition seems much improved, consumers don’t know the true fact- “Today, American citizens simply cannot know the working conditions of the factories that make the products they buy. We cannot know how the chemicals, tools, and technologies in these workplaces affect workers.”(In the Global Apparel Industry, Abusive and Deadly Working Conditions Are Still the Norm)-many workers have to inhale harmful gases, face dangerous situation everyday. More, reports indicate that women make up the vast majority of the workforce, but men make up the supervisors, which is the same as what happened in the Gilded Age. “The darker side of the growing population in cities was racial tension and

Factories are willing to objectify the lives of their employees, much of them being youth, in order to economize. Cutting costs is the primary interest of corporations, of which “‘the only thing they have substantial control over is labor’”, thus, the need for factory labor utilization (White, Atlantic). No one is safe from exhaustive factory labor, as researched by the Atlantic, a news magazine, who found that a Patagonia, a popular American brand, had found inspections that discovered “multiple instances of human trafficking, forced labor, and exploitation in Patagonia’s supply chain” (White, Atlantic). Factory labor, even voluntary, still involves abuse and work until exhaustion. Kathie Lee Gifford, a clothing designer who made a line at Wal-Mart, faced public humiliation when it was discovered that her clothes were being manufactured by “12 and 13-year-olds in Honduras” (Institute for Global Labor and Human Rights).

As mentioned earlier in this paper, government intervention can be very helpful when the market fails. Without any government intervention, many people in the society can be negatively affected. An example would be the overconsumption of products with negative externalities which is the result of demerit goods. The government can intervene by setting a minimum age for consumption and even hold information campaigns to raise awareness. Government intervention is also necessary when prices of goods and services are rising to protect the consumers and when they're falling to protect the producers.

On top of that, those that did sign off on them were loosely administered by the NRA. Because of this, business leaders often didn’t follow the codes. The minimum wages set by the NIRA forced companies to raise their prices for their goods. These codes also favored large corporations rather than small companies. The NRA was ultimately declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in

Another reason so many industrial jobs have left the most developed nations is because of the environmental regulations their governments have imposed. In order to protect the environment, strict limitations are placed on pollution and waste. A consequence of these restrictions is that the companies that employ people send the jobs to countries where the environmental standards are much less stringent. Thus, although the environment is better served by the laws against environmental degradation, the economies of those nations suffer. And although jobs come to the less developed nations, boosting the economies there, the environment suffers because the restrictions against pollution are less strict.

Although minimum wage secures a salary that should secure a decent life for employees it also comes with a decrease in overall employment, so in some way it doesn’t help all the low-level employment since some get unemployed, this event is particular observed in Peru. As such it is necessary for governments to implement alternatives that could suppress the bad effects of minimum wage among them subsidies or increment the education of the low-level employees, this last option could be done in the long run. Finally, even with the adverse effect that brings minimum wage, nowadays is the best way to regulate the labor market in this low-skill segment, especially from a short-term point of

Having a sweatshop is an imperative measure to maintain high level of productivity as labor cost is minimized. Sweatshops become a trend in the industry; therefore, organizations are just following the trend to stay competitive. Manufacturing in sweatshops increases productivity of companies and maximized the profit margin. Besides, to think in a different way, sweatshops help the economy of the poverty country since the international organizations bring in employment opportunities, put in capital and resources into the third world countries. In addition, companies in some situations have to make scarification in order to benefit the employees.

In addition, many unemployed citizens are having a hard time finding a job and think that immigrants are damaging the job market. There are many vacancy jobs that American citizens would not take and immigrants who take the opportunity of those jobs now they are called thieves. Immigrants deserved to be called as people stealing American jobs while immigrants are going hunger and risking everything to find a job. Furthermore, jobs opportunities exist throughout the nation, but taking advantage of those opportunities is what it is causing the

One might think that the farming industry and the technology industry are completely different, but surrounding the subject of immigrant workers both industries share common ideas. Large companies want to know the way that they can make the most money, while also releasing a quality product. The business owners on both sides feel as though American workers are not as qualified or as hardworking as immigrant workers. Yet what these corporations are not telling you is that even legal immigrant workers are not paid as well as what an American would be. It might seem easy to blame these foreign workers, because they are not standing up and asking for better wages or working conditions.

Unfortunately, when companies come knocking at the door of low-income communities, they have a distinct advantage when looking for a place to put a factory and to dump waste. These companies target low-income communities because the families are desperate for jobs and lack the social status to push them out. So, as a solution to this problem, the government must "continue to enact comprehensive laws carrying severe criminal and civil penalties for harming the environment," also at the corporate level "it means rigorous inspections of companies and prosecution of violators" (Eitzen, Smith, and Zinn