The controversial issue of sweatshops and child labor in the underdeveloped countries

By Benjamin PowellDavid B. Many studies have shown that multinational firms pay more than domestic firms in Third World countries. In this paper we compare apparel industry wages and the wages of individual firms accused of being sweatshops to measures of the standard of living in Third World economies.

The controversial issue of sweatshops and child labor in the underdeveloped countries

I would like to thank my opponent for taking this debate. It improves lives Sweatshops don't cause harm.

The controversial issue of sweatshops and child labor in the underdeveloped countries

They provide better job options than the average job in these third-world countries [1]. They are also voluntary contracts between the employer and the employee. Nobody is forcing them to take these jobs. Now, the source mentions a possiblity of the Chinese government forcing people to work in sweatshops.

Major concentrations of the infected victims are people living in the underdeveloped and poorer countries of the world. These alarming statistics also have an effect on the child labor in sweatshops. Labor Practices Introduction When you think about children, chances are you think of them getting up in the morning, going to school then coming home and going . Sweatshops in countries like China, Bangladesh and Haiti have been known to produce clothing for the company, with Chinese labour workers in particular being paid 33 to 41 cents an hour, with numerous employees being as young as 14 years of age with no health benefits or .

If this is true, then these are not the core idea of sweatshops, and that would have more to do with communism. Any sweatshops that involve physical force to get people to work are to be ignored by this debate.

I believe that this is all I need for now. Report this Argument Con So far in this debate, Pro has cited one contention only: Of course he has the burden of explaining how sweatshops improve lives; we can not automatically accept it to be true as that commits the argument from ignorance fallacy.

In support of his contention, Pro notes three specific factors: So, while the workers aren't "forced" to work in certain places, they must choose to survive to work under people who abuse them daily.

They also suffer psychological abuse as many are forced to work under armed supervision and are physically assaulted with no legal protection if their productivity is not up to standards. Workers are also forced to work overtime; if they do not work overtime without extra pay they are fired - despite overtime obviously not being a part of the contract.

Many workers report rape, and again survival mandates they keep their jobs thus more psychological, emotional and physical damage [1].

If "better" simply concerns wages, then essentially the argument is that one could choose to have a dangerous, exhausting and unsafe job in a sweatshop vs. While one might choose to work in a sweatshop for their own survival to afford the costs of minimal standards of livingthen in no way does it make sweatshops ethical, but rather shows how they are a means to an end.

Indeed something can only be considered a sweatshop in the first place if it specifically aims to keep the workers as poor as possible by maximizing profits for the company while having no regard for employees. Many economists have suggested that sweatshops actually improve the standard of living because they create a demand for employees.

For instance, by paying workers so little, there is a demand for their labor which incrases company investment in their labor. More demand for their labor means competition amongst companies to compete by offering them higher wages and better conditions.

While this little scenario seems nice, this is not the reality of what occurs. In reality, once the workers can demand higher wages or better conditions, companies simply move to another country; they find people who are even more desparate to employ.

In this way, they can still pay as little as possible for labor, and all of the people who were once employed by sweatshops in one country lose their jobs thus remaining poor. Demand for their labor doesn't increase because companies simply hire different labor.

Their jobs are outsourced putting them once again in a vulnerable position where any labor at all seems better than starvation. So, as you can see, this system is oppressive as it doesn't truly give laborers the opportunity to invest or raise above their current economic standard, nor does it ensure a minimal standard of living.

Instead, they are trapped in a vicious cycle that keeps them poor. Capitalism fails in this regard as the idea is that demand for labor will increase, though this actually is not true.

Pro says that having a small wage via sweatshops is better than having a smaller wage from a non-sweatshop. The very core of economics supply and demand says otherwise. If the people are poorer, demand will be lower since they will not be able to afford as much.

Lower demand means lower prices. We see that reflected in our own society; people are losing their jobs, and as such the cost of things like houses has dropped drastically in order to remain competitive.Adidas denies ignoring workers' rights for the sake of profit, claiming they have strict labour codes and constantly monitoring wage levels and conditions to ensure a good working environment.

Sweatshops in countries like China, Bangladesh and Haiti have been known to produce clothing for the company, with Chinese labour workers in particular being paid 33 to 41 cents an hour, with numerous employees being as young as 14 years of age with no health benefits or .

Sweatshop conditions include excessive working hours, forced overtime, poverty wages, child labour, unsafe working conditions, discrimination, verbal and physical abuse [2].

3. A sweatshop is a factory where workers are subject to extreme exploitation, including super-low wages, no benefits, filthy or dangerous working conditions, denial of their worker and human rights. Over the past decade U.S. firms and their subcontractors have faced protests from student groups, labor leaders, and some government officials for employing sweatshop labor.

Sweatshops are generally characterized as places of employment that have low pay, poor working conditions, and long hours. Child Labor Essay Examples.

The controversial issue of sweatshops and child labor in the underdeveloped countries

97 total results. The Controversial Issue of Sweatshops and Child Labor in the Underdeveloped Countries. words. 2 pages.

Legal Ownership

The Debate About Child Labor in the United States. 1, words. 4 pages. A Comprehensive Analysis of Florence Kelley in Labor Pain, Child Labor.

The UN convention on banning child labor according to legal age limits (which broadly cites a “national legal minimum working age, which should be aligned with international standards.

The effects of child labor in sweatshops today | Teen Ink