Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The subject of buying Chinese goods came up in another thread and it was agreed between me and another poster that if it was to be discussed than an OT thread would be necessary. As OP I get the (debateable) benefit of firing the first shot. And so, here is why I believe that buying goods manufactured in China is unethical (And before you begin, YES I do buy them myself, a subject that I will get to in a minute).

To begin with, I have to clarify that when I say China I am referring either to the country as an economic unit, or to the chinese government. It should be obvious which meaning I am using, but if there is any chance of confusion I will make it clear. I will not be referring to the chinese people, who you will see I have most concern for.

China is evil. I will make this bold statement because it is worth stating. The Chinese government is built on power-lust, lies, supression of information and (least importantly in the long run, but still horribly evil) Murder. If yopu have been paying attention at all this should be apparent, and the trend began in its modern form while the west were still distracted by the Soviets. It is an Orwellian and plausibly-sustainable system that will most likely spread to new territories. If we don't agree that China is totally nasty and not something that we want around in its current form than I'm afraid this whole argument is pointless.

Chinese also controls a sixth of the worlds workforce, and since the government is about power and not it's own people that workforce is used like any other resource. Without it China would just be a praticularly screwed up third world country (all countries, first, second or third world are screwed up, but some moreso than others). That huge workforce is power enough, but that one sixth is misleading because most of that workforce ACTUALLY works. China has an unemployment rate of 4%, which is fantasticly low. Further, those people work harder for less money. The majority work in manufacturing, whereas I can say from personal experience that Qatar, which has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world, PRODUCES nothing except oil. The rest of the workforce just keep the country going. China are the manufacturers of the world

In this way, China has grown fantasticly wealthy. Not the people of course, but certainly the government. Further it means that China has the ability to greatly screw with us any time that they want because they control the means of production. I now quote the Communist Manifesto (because its fun and pretentious, and also because of the caonfused relationship between communism, socialism, Totalitarianism and China):

The bourgeoisie keeps more and more doing away with the scattered state of the population, of the means of production, and of property. It has agglomerated population, centralised the means of production, and has concentrated property in a few hands. The necessary consequence of this was political centralisation. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became lumped together into one nation, with one government, one code of laws, one national class-interest, one frontier, and one customs-tariff.

He who controls the means of production has an objective control of the world that exists outside of a contained system of economics.

The boiling down of this is that having China produce our stuff is bad for us. However, it is also bad for the people of China because it forces us to abuse them to support their government. Their government exists purely to exploit them in order to sustain itself and if we aren't careful it may eventually consume us as well. If China was paying fair wages and giving good hours and benefits than they would become just like any country, which is good for everybody except the people in power. If our production was taken out of China than there would of course be a very nasty period (a billion people aren't going to become self-sustainable overnight) but at the moment China is like a rubber band that has been pulled very far in one direction and there will be chaos before some form of normalcy can be returned. I can't say exactly what would happen if the west stopped hiring China to make things (not a feasible scenario anyway since our own means of production would have to be ramped up first) but the situation would have to get better in the end, if only because it cannot get any worse, and more likely because starving people tend to have less fear of death from other means.

Stopping for a breather, up to this point I have attempted to demonstrate why producing in China in the first place is an unethical buissness practice. I promise that we are in the homestretch as I argue that buying Chinese goods is also unethical.

The free market is incredible. It is based largely on nature and so is generally, though not enitrely, self-sustainable. But it has a few cracks, and there are two in praticular which I want to highlight here.

Firstly, it sometimes requires everybody to behave in the same way in order to compete. If this means making faster processors or developing more efficiant cars than this is fine, because that is the entire point of having a free market. But sometimes, as in the case of the entire economic collapse, it makes people do stupid unsustainable things. Everybody is moving, or has moved production to China because of the second crack:

The free market is not based on what is best for people, but on what they think is best for them. This has firstly led to the rise of advertising (a concept which I would not object to had it not become so manipulative and insidious, often cheapening real information) and also to a whole host of backend problems. In this case, people at first see that one thing is cheaper than another. The free market is supposed to make things as cheap as possible, so people feel comfortable buying cheap things. Even if they know that Chinese production is bad they won't think about it 90% of the time.

It is therefore unethical to buy things made in china because it abuses these small cracks in the system. Every time it is abused it becomes a bigger, nastier crack. And soon we will be falling through it.

On a side note, I mentioned at the beginning that I buy things from China. This is simply because it is impossible not to. I am not proud of it, and I try to avoid it, but some things are simply unavailable otherwise. It is simply not feasible for one person to dismantle their whole lives to support a cause which everyone has chosen to ignore. That said, even the act of writing this has strengthened my resolve to try and keep things in countries that aren't as evil.

Ok, one more VERY brief thing. In the other thread India came up. While they have the same labour problems (EDIT: By which I mean, people make very little money for their work) the government is at least not clearly evil. I still would prefer not to buy things from their, but at least I can pretend that I am supporting the person who made the thing without thinking so much about their government.

As a reward for getting through that essay

Outsourcing man. welcome to a flat world.(please let people get that reference.)

garret wrote:Outsourcing man. welcome to a flat world.(please let people get that reference.)

He gets the reference. He can't say He likes how it blurs the lines defining of what specificly he is talking about...but he gets it.

He also puts the lotion in the basket...

I would like to see your list of goods that you as an individual are required to purchase specifically from China, for survival purposes.

Your TV? Well, that, your computer, and numerous other goods can be purchased from other economies. This is not to say that you won't run into complications while attempting to do so, just that yes, it is possible on the whole of it.

In short, and getting straight to the point. It is not evil, nor unethical to purchase goods that are manufactured/distributed through dominance of the marketplace. If you want to buy U.S., get a Ford.

i would buy a ford but i dont want my car breaking down when i drive out of the lot.

Which is why I buy Toyota.

Wrexasaur wrote:I would like to see your list of goods that you as an individual are required to purchase specifically from China, for survival purposes.

Your TV? Well, that, your computer, and numerous other goods can be purchased from other economies. This is not to say that you won't run into complications while attempting to do so, just that yes, it is possible on the whole of it.

In short, and getting straight to the point. It is not evil, nor unethical to purchase goods that are manufactured/distributed through dominance of the marketplace. If you want to buy U.S., get a Ford.

Thank you for completely ignoring the long and careful argument that I just made in which I deal specificly with the problem of the free market, admit to myself having done something unethecal and reaffirmed that I would try harder to adhere to this principle. On top of that, whether or not You or I do it has nothing to do with whether or not it is ethical, just with how hard we try to do the right thing (for our own survival or anyone elses).

Ahahahahahaha...
.
.
.
.
Ahahahahahaha

avantgarde wrote:Ahahahahahaha...
.
.
.
.
Ahahahahahaha

I hate the internet sometimes.

nintendoeats wrote:Thank you for completely ignoring the long and careful argument that I just made in which I deal specificly with the problem of the free market, admit to myself having done something unethecal and reaffirmed that I would try harder to adhere to this principle.

Your essay, as it stands, was very hard for me to follow point for point. In terms of citations you have none, so I just cut that fat, and responded to your direct point.

On top of that, whether or not You or I do it has nothing to do with whether or not it is ethical, just with how hard we try to do the right thing (for our own survival or anyone elses).

What is the right thing? You yourself briefly mentioned that withdrawing money from China en masse, would cripple much more than the government that you hate. Your going from a concept of economics, to a concept of economical morality, without tying any of the strings together clear enough for me as an individual to understand without confusion.

The internet, a place where communication is difficult, and limited by the amount of energy, expended on making it accessible to your audience.

Chinese beer sucks. Tsing Tao is nasty.

Also good lucky buying a WHOLE computer with nothing made in China (maybe a Mac but I want a computer that actually acts as more than a $1000 paper weight).

Why should communication on the internet be difficult? its still writing, which has been the main form of intellectual communication for a good 3000 years.

If you didn't understand something about the post (which was long and complicated by forum standards but a cakewalk compared to any decent essay) please ask what I mean and I will clarify. This is the advantage that the internet has over books, and something that socrates would have loved: I can put down a permanent record while still leaving it a living thing that can be improved upon immediatly.

As to economics vs. economic morality, I have yet to encounter a way of determining what was "ethical" that didn't boild down to weighing end results. I am weighing the end results of leaving China as a manufacturer vs. pulling out our money. If that wasn't clear, it might have been a little bit of essay ghosting as I often have to re-arrange ideas to get them out properly.

@Fateweaver: As far as I'm concerned, once we deal with China, a sustainable energy and environment policy, nuclear weapons and our economic system, Apple and their bretheran of manipulative advertising giants are going to be the biggest threats to the ongoing health of our population. However, I think if an argument about China and Apple were combined the internet would explode as all members of the online community rushed to invoke Godwin.

Edit: Also, some iPods at least are made in china. I don't know about everything else...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its one in the morning and I'm going to bed. Will check back in the morning.

nintendoeats wrote:The subject of buying Chinese goods came up in another thread and it was agreed between me and another poster that if it was to be discussed than an OT thread would be necessary. As OP I get the (debateable) benefit of firing the first shot. And so, here is why I believe that buying goods manufactured in China is unethical (And before you begin, YES I do buy them myself, a subject that I will get to in a minute).

Interesting essay. I don't really agree with the conclusion but I do agree with a lot of your reasoning along the way.

China is evil. I will make this bold statement because it is worth stating. The Chinese government is built on power-lust, lies, supression of information and (least importantly in the long run, but still horribly evil) Murder. If yopu have been paying attention at all this should be apparent, and the trend began in its modern form while the west were still distracted by the Soviets. It is an Orwellian and plausibly-sustainable system that will most likely spread to new territories. If we don't agree that China is totally nasty and not something that we want around in its current form than I'm afraid this whole argument is pointless.

I agree that the Chinese government is bad and not something we want in its current form, but it is a lot more complicated than simply calling it evil. Within that system there are reformist movements, there are individuals receptive to increasing the representation of the people, to increasing transparency and to cracking down on corruption.

So while I’d agree that in its present form the Chinese government is not a good thing, I’d also argue that the most likely way that will improve is through internal reform.

Chinese also controls a sixth of the worlds workforce, and since the government is about power and not it's own people that workforce is used like any other resource. Without it China would just be a praticularly screwed up third world country (all countries, first, second or third world are screwed up, but some moreso than others). That huge workforce is power enough, but that one sixth is misleading because most of that workforce ACTUALLY works. China has an unemployment rate of 4%, which is fantasticly low. Further, those people work harder for less money. The majority work in manufacturing, whereas I can say from personal experience that Qatar, which has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world, PRODUCES nothing except oil. The rest of the workforce just keep the country going. China are the manufacturers of the world

Sort of, but it’s hard to understand the scale of underemployment in China without going there. As an example, I visited the Purple Mountains, outside of Nanjing. There were multiple entry points to the park, in the off-season, so no booth was likely to see more than a dozen people each hour. Despite this there was at least half a dozen ticketing officers at my booth, one person actually serving and the rest sleeping in the back.

Which is the effect of very low wages, it improves employment but at the cost of productivity – if a person is paid a very low wage its easier to have surplus people doing nothing than to actually put everyone to a useful purpose.

In this way, China has grown fantasticly wealthy. Not the people of course, but certainly the government. Further it means that China has the ability to greatly screw with us any time that they want because they control the means of production.

It is important to remember China is as dependant on us as we are on them. The legitimacy of the Chinese system is very dependant on progress and the rapidly growing economy. The GFC led to a downturn in demand for Chinese goods, resulting in businesses closings and a sharp increase in unemployment. There was rioting on the streets and people died. If the Chinese government were to stop trade with us they’d be overthrown before we would.

I dug the Manifesto quote by the way – it’s actually a really insightful book. Not to be taken at face value, obviously, but well worth a read.

The free market is incredible. It is based largely on nature and so is generally, though not enitrely, self-sustainable. But it has a few cracks, and there are two in praticular which I want to highlight here.

The free market is good because it is the most efficient model, but it is not based on nature. It’s basic laws, property ownership and free trade, are quite contrived. But that’s a nitpick, and probably heading into OT land.

It is therefore unethical to buy things made in china because it abuses these small cracks in the system. Every time it is abused it becomes a bigger, nastier crack. And soon we will be falling through it.

Except I think the best solution to the problem is for Chinese workers to continue growing in skill, in education and in wages. In time this will produce a middle class capable of ensuring improved rights and a better government.

China is already moving beyond very low added industries – while wages are very low they are now markedly higher than in other Asian countries. As a result basic textiles are moving out of China while they are picking up slightly more skilled work.

On a side note, I mentioned at the beginning that I buy things from China. This is simply because it is impossible not to. I am not proud of it, and I try to avoid it, but some things are simply unavailable otherwise. It is simply not feasible for one person to dismantle their whole lives to support a cause which everyone has chosen to ignore. That said, even the act of writing this has strengthened my resolve to try and keep things in countries that aren't as evil.

Fair enough in my opinion. Someone can recognise that something needs fixing on a national or global level without making an ineffective symbolic gesture. For example, it is possible to support tax reform to remove superannuation tax shelters as it will make a big difference once everyone loses access, while using those same structures personally just to stay level with everyone else.

Ok, one more VERY breif thing. In the other thread India came up. While they have the same labour problems the government is at least not clearly evil. I still would prefer not to buy things from their, but at least I can pretend that I am supporting the person who made the thing without thinking so much about their government.

The differences between India and China are fascinating. India is democratic, but when people talk about their politicians being criminals… in India they mean it. A startling portion of parliament have outstanding investigations against them for murder, and they aren’t trumped up charges – many of these guys are gangsters who use their control of poor neighbourhoods to get the votes necessary to reach parliament.

But they are democratic, the papers are free and the political debate in India is focussed on real issues as a result.

It sure is unethical, but since pretty much everything we've got in our houses is made in China...

nintendoeats wrote:Why should communication on the internet be difficult? its still writing, which has been the main form of intellectual communication for a good 3000 years.

Without dragging the anchor of this thread out of place, I will simply say that it has always been difficult to clearly convey an idea to a large group of people. I am a graph and charts man, I like clear cut data. If you had included information referencing your rather short summaries, I would be able to follow what you are saying much easier.

As to economics vs. economic morality, I have yet to encounter a way of determining what was "ethical" that didn't boild down to weighing end results. I am weighing the end results of leaving China as a manufacturer vs. pulling out our money. If that wasn't clear, it might have been a little bit of essay ghosting as I often have to re-arrange ideas to get them out properly.

This is all I was pointing at, nothing more. Format is key, and I often have a hard time with many essays because of it. My flow of thought, probably doesn't resemble yours within any specific guidelines.

Sebster did a great job of bridging that gap, and filling in many of the blanks.

nintendoeats wrote:
China is evil. I will make this bold statement because it is worth stating. The Chinese government is built on power-lust, lies, supression of information and (least importantly in the long run, but still horribly evil) Murder. If yopu have been paying attention at all this should be apparent, and the trend began in its modern form while the west were still distracted by the Soviets. It is an Orwellian and plausibly-sustainable system that will most likely spread to new territories. If we don't agree that China is totally nasty and not something that we want around in its current form than I'm afraid this whole argument is pointless.

This is your whole argument. As soon as you label a thing as being evil any act which supports that thing becomes unethical.

Remember parents. Don't let your kids put Chinese toys in their mouths.

The unsafe levels of lead and other toxic heavy metals will kill them.

Wonder why no American made toys in the past 5 years have been recalled due to toxicity?

I get it. Because Chinese products are sooooooo much better and our economy will become better the more we import in from China and the less of our own goods we produce.

American drywall? Naw, feth American workers; let's support China. American toys? Naw, feth American workers; let's support China.

Yeah, China is helping our economy so good. Tell that to American homeowners who have insurance companies that won't cover their houses because they bought faulty drywall.

Hmm. On second thought that's a good strategy. Let the Chinese export everything here and when it starts to hurt Americans or ruin their lives somehow they'll buy American. Clever. Using Chinese crap to drive up sales of American products.

Sneaky government.

But fateweaver , it might be too late by then.
Would the population be able to resist the cheaper alternative? Its like trying to wiggle out of quick sand , seems like a good idea till you sink lower o_o

I don't buy Chinese if I can help it.

Unfortunately a couple of key components in my computer are made in China and seeing as how they are soldered onto my mobo I can't really replace them.

I

I'm rather ill and couldn't sleep, thought I might as well throw up another post. (yuck!)

sebster wrote:
I agree that the Chinese government is bad and not something we want in its current form, but it is a lot more complicated than simply calling it evil. Within that system there are reformist movements, there are individuals receptive to increasing the representation of the people, to increasing transparency and to cracking down on corruption.

So while I’d agree that in its present form the Chinese government is not a good thing, I’d also argue that the most likely way that will improve is through internal reform.

You obviously have a much better knowledge of the internal workings of China than I do (having been there and all). Your insight does change the input variable somewhat, but not enough for me to change my opinion on the matter. I suppose the term "Evil" is rather extreme. However, you must understand that I have read 1984 at least once every year since I was 15. I HATE governments of this type and fear them even more. I am simply pessimistic about them.

Ironicly, if there is some internal resistance that may be even worse (unless it works of course). In 1984 the only real glimmer oh hope (except the virtual impossibility of Prole uprising) is that within 2 or 3 generations everybody will be comfortable and satisfied in their lives of servitude (not to go too far OT, I think that this is happening to some extent in western countries, but that is a whole other, more complicated debate). If the resistance in China comes to nothing than it means a failure to properly mind control the citizens into contentment.

I have hardly given up hope to that extent yet, so all the power to them!

sebster wrote:
Sort of, but it’s hard to understand the scale of underemployment in China without going there. As an example, I visited the Purple Mountains, outside of Nanjing. There were multiple entry points to the park, in the off-season, so no booth was likely to see more than a dozen people each hour. Despite this there was at least half a dozen ticketing officers at my booth, one person actually serving and the rest sleeping in the back.

Which is the effect of very low wages, it improves employment but at the cost of productivity – if a person is paid a very low wage its easier to have surplus people doing nothing than to actually put everyone to a useful purpose.

Be that as it may (again, you clearly know more than I do) we wouldn't want to belittle how huge their workforce is.

sebster wrote:
It is important to remember China is as dependant on us as we are on them. The legitimacy of the Chinese system is very dependant on progress and the rapidly growing economy. The GFC led to a downturn in demand for Chinese goods, resulting in businesses closings and a sharp increase in unemployment. There was rioting on the streets and people died. If the Chinese government were to stop trade with us they’d be overthrown before we would.

I totally agree, and that is why I want to see our economic ties substantially reduced. I know it would be hard on China, but in the long run we have a limited window of opportunity before the orient can kick the occident in the head and steal its birthday (I realise I was using over-general terms there, but it sounded funny). I want us to take it. We almost certainly won't

sebster wrote:I dug the Manifesto quote by the way – it’s actually a really insightful book. Not to be taken at face value, obviously, but well worth a read.

Yes, and short to. Its a shame, they had such good intentions. If only they had realised that a change in government would not eliminate the class warfare that they so elegantly defined.

sebster wrote:
The free market is good because it is the most efficient model, but it is not based on nature. It’s basic laws, property ownership and free trade, are quite contrived. But that’s a nitpick, and probably heading into OT land.

Yes it is. I would clarify what I mean, but somebody would certainly make a fuss and the OT is one that I am sick of debating. Its not important to my argument anyway, I was just trying to frame how I picture the system in my head.

sebster wrote:
Except I think the best solution to the problem is for Chinese workers to continue growing in skill, in education and in wages. In time this will produce a middle class capable of ensuring improved rights and a better government.

China is already moving beyond very low added industries – while wages are very low they are now markedly higher than in other Asian countries. As a result basic textiles are moving out of China while they are picking up slightly more skilled work.

I suppose that is good, but once again I am a pessimist. I realise that you couldn't argue against the phrase "I am a pessimist" without some sweeping run of good news, but I couuld not in good conscience say that I agree with something that I am so uncertain about. However, if low quality textiles are being moved out of China I must remember to buy cheaper pants next time.

sebster wrote:
The differences between India and China are fascinating. India is democratic, but when people talk about their politicians being criminals… in India they mean it. A startling portion of parliament have outstanding investigations against them for murder, and they aren’t trumped up charges – many of these guys are gangsters who use their control of poor neighbourhoods to get the votes necessary to reach parliament.

But they are democratic, the papers are free and the political debate in India is focussed on real issues as a result.

And that is where my crusade ends. to quote Orwell (I love doing that)

orwell wrote:"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else shall follow."

So long as people both can and will talk about real things in a reasonable and intellectually-honest way, I think they can handle their own thieves and murderers.

I respect the logic behind your opinion on the matter and would not fight to change it unless some new piece of information were added to the mix. I think this is what is callled a "legitimate difference of opinion." I can't remember the last time I saw one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

nintendoeats wrote:
China is evil. I will make this bold statement because it is worth stating. The Chinese government is built on power-lust, lies, supression of information and (least importantly in the long run, but still horribly evil) Murder. If yopu have been paying attention at all this should be apparent, and the trend began in its modern form while the west were still distracted by the Soviets. It is an Orwellian and plausibly-sustainable system that will most likely spread to new territories. If we don't agree that China is totally nasty and not something that we want around in its current form than I'm afraid this whole argument is pointless.

This is your whole argument. As soon as you label a thing as being evil any act which supports that thing becomes unethical.

well, to that I say two things

1....and the problem is what?....

2. I did detail specificly why I think that supporting China would be bad both for us and the Chinese people. It would be unfair to simply dismiss them because I called China evil.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Wrexasaur I can appreciate that not everybodies writing style is going to be accesible to everyone. I tend to see ideas in and of themselves as having shapes, so if math plays a part in my thought process I tend to take away the idea and not the numbers. different strokes I suppose. Both forms of intellection are important.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Ok, now I really am going to bed)

nintendoeats wrote:

well, to that I say two things

1....and the problem is what?....

I said that there was a problem? Still, stating an axiom is generally not convincing.

nintendoeats wrote:
2. I did detail specificly why I think that supporting China would be bad both for us and the Chinese people. It would be unfair to simply dismiss them because I called China evil.

But you didn't explain how it would be bad for the Chinese people, or us, for that matter. You simply said that it would be as such.

nintendoeats wrote:I'm rather ill and couldn't sleep, thought I might as well throw up another post. (yuck!)

Hope you feel better in the morning.

You obviously have a much better knowledge of the internal workings of China than I do (having been there and all).

I wouldn't go that far, I backpacked around for two months. It's enough to blow away a lot of simple misconceptions (I honestly thought the people there were dominated by government but it turns out their lives are a lot less different than you'd assume) but it isn't like I've got a whole lot of experience on the matter.

Your insight does change the input variable somewhat, but not enough for me to change my opinion on the matter. I suppose the term "Evil" is rather extreme. However, you must understand that I have read 1984 at least once every year since I was 15. I HATE governments of this type and fear them even more. I am simply pessimistic about them.

It's a great book. And I agree that the Chinese government is good, I just disagree over the suggested approach to the issue. I'm a big fan of the idea that more open, more prosperous countries are more likely to build a decent government.

Ironicly, if there is some internal resistance that may be even worse (unless it works of course). In 1984 the only real glimmer oh hope (except the virtual impossibility of Prole uprising) is that within 2 or 3 generations everybody will be comfortable and satisfied in their lives of servitude (not to go too far OT, I think that this is happening to some extent in western countries, but that is a whole other, more complicated debate). If the resistance in China comes to nothing than it means a failure to properly mind control the citizens into contentment.

There is a fundamental difference in that 1984 was a deliberate work of fiction, in which Ingsoc was created as the worst of totalitarian socialism. The big idea that they were interested in nothing more than control, was made explicit, and Ingsoc themselves were aware that this was ultimately their aim. In the real world it's a lot more complicated than that, even in the worst totalitarian government you won't find many people that are happily evil, there are always justifications and rationalisations for what they're doing. In time, given a strong and patient reform movement a government like China's can be reformed.

Look at what happened to end Soviet Russia, in the end the reform was driven by Soviet authorities who realised their collective economy just wasn't working (they replaced it with a kleptocracy, but that's beside the point).

Be that as it may (again, you clearly know more than I do) we wouldn't want to belittle how huge their workforce is.

Yeah, it's a vast workforce, that's true. It's just that comparisons between developing countries and developed countries, such as a direct comparisons of unemployment rates, are often misleading.

I totally agree, and that is why I want to see our economic ties substantially reduced. I know it would be hard on China, but in the long run we have a limited window of opportunity before the orient can kick the occident in the head and steal its birthday (I realise I was using over-general terms there, but it sounded funny). I want us to take it. We almost certainly won't

I'd rather continue working with the Chinese, in the hope that a more open, more prosperous China will develop a more representative, fair government. After all, they've improved a lot in the last few decades.

I suppose that is good, but once again I am a pessimist. I realise that you couldn't argue against the phrase "I am a pessimist" without some sweeping run of good news, but I couuld not in good conscience say that I agree with something that I am so uncertain about. However, if low quality textiles are being moved out of China I must remember to buy cheaper pants next time.

They're being moved to other Asian countries, most of whom now have a competitive advantage over the Chinese as they use the exploitative working conditions the Chinese used to kickstart their manufacturing 20 or 30 years ago.

And that is where my crusade ends. to quote Orwell (I love doing that)

orwell wrote:"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else shall follow."

So long as people both can and will talk about real things in a reasonable and intellectually-honest way, I think they can handle their own thieves and murderers.

I think as a country becomes more prosperous, the number of citizens who have the education to form such opinions grow, as does the number who can look beyond mere survival. As such, I think closing trade with the Chinese government would be disastrous for the hopes of reform in China.

I respect the logic behind your opinion on the matter and would not fight to change it unless some new piece of information were added to the mix. I think this is what is callled a "legitimate difference of opinion." I can't remember the last time I saw one.

Yeah, and I think the issue is complicated enough that there are a lot more than two sides. I've probably ended up sounding like I believe that we should keep trading with China and just expect things will improve in time, but I do recognise the need to pressure the Chinese authorities to improve human rights, to respect the independance of ethnic minorities and all that stuff.

Applying that pressure has become a lot harder after our Western governments did all that torture stuff, but in time hopefully it'll start to gain traction again.

If the U.S goverment stopped giving tax breaks to companies to fire 90% of their workforce then move to China, If a country US or UK produced thinks it can produce instead of importing to china there wouold be lower unemployment all the goverment has to do is say to china we will impose a higher rate of import tax until you sort your human rights issues.

I would say that the Chinese goverment is not evil, but they have (of recent years) been more interested in external apperance (actions in construction of the olympic games) than of the people they are supposed to rule. The goverment seems to forget that they were put in power by a peoples revolution, so treating your population like gak will probably lead to another revalution (communist or otherwise). But until then the US, UK or UN will do nothing

I don't want this to turn into a war thread, but
Iraq- suspected WMD's, human rights violations, anti-American, invaded other countries
China- definate WMD's, human rights violations, invaded Tibet a non-aggressive country then took it over, pro- America

it looks live you can be a goverment as long as you know the right people

@Sebster

Yes like most things that require any kind of abstraction from hard facts this seems to be a huge grey area. I hate those, but this is the world.

I got on a "never buy made in China" kick a few years back. I ran into a stark reality. It's really hard to not buy "made in China". It takes a lot of work. And buy the time you have went to several stores looking for a specific item, not "made in China" you have exhuasted yourself and an entire day.

I really don't know what the solution to the problem is, but I certainly wouldn't classify purchasing goods made in China as unethical. I would classify it as regrettable.

GG

I'm ultimately indifferent to China, but they will hopefully collapse into a burning cesspit of anarchy and genocide.

and no, I'm not under any illusion that they are our "friends" in any way, in fact, I expect the US and Russia to be on the same side against them within 50 years.

I got "Authentic Irish Shot Glasses" the other day from a well known crystal/glass company.

Made in China. I lolled.

BluntmanDC wrote:If the U.S goverment stopped giving tax breaks to companies to fire 90% of their workforce then move to China, If a country US or UK produced thinks it can produce instead of importing to china there wouold be lower unemployment all the goverment has to do is say to china we will impose a higher rate of import tax until you sort your human rights issues.

Actually, both countries and many others besides have signed international trade treaties, and can't increase the rate of tariff at will. Even if they waited for the treaties to expire and then set China a new rate they'd find out quite a few things very quickly. China isn't the only place that can make low quality goods at very low prices, anywhere with low wages and functioning government can do the same. The second thing you'd find is that you wouldn't want to manufacture half of that stuff yourself - that high local wages are created because the majority of domestic production is in high end products - skilled manufacturing and aircraft.

The goverment seems to forget that they were put in power by a peoples revolution, so treating your population like gak will probably lead to another revalution (communist or otherwise).

Very unlikely, given the people treated badly are almost universally the poor and uneducated, who are not capable nor inclined towards revolution. The living standards among the middle classes are improving dramatically and that's what really matters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nintendoeats wrote:@Sebster

Yes like most things that require any kind of abstraction from hard facts this seems to be a huge grey area. I hate those, but this is the world.

Such is life.

China is just out to make a buck, nothing wrong with that. China isn't evil or the enemy, the real evil ones are the countries using china for cheap labor instead of creating jobs on their own turf. That's the unethical part. Even if china stopped with the cheap labor thing, some other country would just step up and fill their shoes. All that matters to corporations is the bottom line. Doesn't matter where it's made, corps are all the same and the bigger they get the less they'll spend and the more they'll charge for their products. I think it's pretty much impossible to buy any kinda toy or gadget or car or whatever that isn't at least partly made in china, and if it's not made in china chances are the company found somewhere else to make it cheaper. it's all about quantity over quality these days.

sebster wrote:Unlikely, given the people treated badly are almost universally the poor and uneducated, who are not capable nor inclined towards revolution. The living standards among the middle classes are improving dramatically and that's what really matters.

You don't need to be educated to rebel, there will come a point when the last straw is reached and people will rebel.

The one thing about ethical trading, are the people who go 'oh we always buy fair trade' but then have electronics built in sweat shops