Re: Thomas
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:China and Brazil are only two examples of what I described. The result of such low cost labor is exploitation and gives their corrupt political leaders license to continue the practice for their own's class' financial greed.
Further, the exploitation also results in a huge sucking sound to the lowest common denominator for labor wages in the U.S. If US manufacturers don't fall in line, they disappear along with their jobs and the middle class. Who will be left to buy WalMart's merchandise?
BBB
Are you aware that you are re-stating a fallacy that has been thoroughly debunked since 1817? It is so common it even has a name --
the pauper labor fallacy -- and its reputation among economists is no better as that of geocentric astronomy is among physicists and that of creationism, among biologists.
Briefly, your fallacy is to confuse cause and effect. Brazilians and Chinese aren't poor because Wal-Mart pays them low wages; Wal-Mart pays them low wages because their economies as a whole are unproductive and hence their incomes are low. Wal-Mart's contribution (and Nike's, and Fords', and ...) is to make them less poor than they would be without them.
I'm not sure if you're interested in discussing this. But if you are, I recommend two articles in which Paul Krugman, an author with excellent liberal credentials, explains just
why your argument is a fallacy, and a harmful one at that. The articles are titled
"Hearts and Heads" and
"In Praise of cheap labor".
I applaud your intention to lift the Brazilians and Indonesians up, but your economic theories would drag them even further down if they became policy.