From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Mon Apr 16 2001 - 21:12:01 MDT
hal@finney.org wrote:
> Brian D Williams, <talon57@well.com>, writes:
> > I am arguing that a country should maintain core competencies in
> > the basics of life, it should grow as much of it's own food as
> > possible (and economical), it should produce much of it's own
> > clothing.
>
> Why? And why does this reasoning not apply to the smaller units like
> states and cities and houses?
Substitute in "an area of relatively homogenous laws and ethics" for
"country". You live off means where you can bear the method of
manufacture.
That's Brian's argument, anyway. I'd rather see sweatshops replaced by
cheap robotics (as in, lower total cost of ownership than paying enough
sweatshop employees for equivalent output), so it wouldn't matter where
the factory is since there's far less, if any, "exploited" labor.
"But what about the sweatshop workers who wouldn't be able to make
$1/hour any longer?" If they are forced to find more productive uses
of their time to avoid starvation (say, gaining the educational base
that citizens of industrialized areas take for granted), they will.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:01 MST