It is not always the job of the consumer. This notion that each citizen dictates the best course of action is absurd. Companies do not advertise their negative aspects.
Exxon lobbied hard for drilling in Alaska, but you don't see signs at the pump like "Before you fill up, you should know that you are supporting a campaign to drill in National Parks for oil".
The majority of citizens are passive, but if you ask, I'm sure they'd like more laws protecting privacy so they don't have to make a full-time job out of it.
Yeah! And I don't see the problem with sweatshops either... I mean, it's easy to find out that GAP/Nike/Banana Republic/Old Navy all exploit sweatshop labor. Obviously people make the choice each time they shop that cheap, fashionable clothes are more important than human rights... It's the free market working, Yeah baby!
Of course, people don't make such decisions, because they don't have the time to investigate each purchase. They count on laws and ethics to protect them from supporting such behavior (which it doesn't). If the previous argument holds, then there's no need for the FDA... we can all investigate each resturaunt ourselves beforehand to find out if the meat is rancid or the employees washed their hands. How silly of me to throw a 'hissy fit' for wanting clean food.
And what Free Market? Farm subsidies, corporate tax breaks, etc? We haven't yet had a free market to try out.
Absolutely! Unfortunately, most companies, backed by our loving government, forbid unionization. Ad to that NAFTA, the WTO, and the Bush's future Fast Track, and you have a labor movement so crippled that I wonder how it could be effective. Your workers strike? Move the whole operation to Bangelor or China, put 20,000 US workers in the unemployment line, and pat yourself on the back for increasing shareholder's profits at the same time.
What we need, if we are not going to stand for these types of abuses, is to oppose and repeal trade agreements that weaken labor rights, and to pass a law such that no employer can prevent, discourage, or punish an employee from/for joining a union.
Globalism is great for multinational corporations. Big business depends on cheap labor as a commodity to be sought out and exploited. Globalism removes the weak boundaries that might prevent a company from laying off it's entire domestic workforce and shipping it's jobs and money overseas... ala Nike. A strict utalitarian might argue that it betters the lives of workers in other nations by giving them a slightly better wage. Given the current climate of flag-wavin, USA-cheerin americans, it's hard to imagine people getting excited about allowing more US workers to get the axe just so that corporations can improve their bottom line.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not always the job of the consumer. This notion that each citizen dictates the best course of action is absurd. Companies do not advertise their negative aspects. Exxon lobbied hard for drilling in Alaska, but you don't see signs at the pump like "Before you fill up, you should know that you are supporting a campaign to drill in National Parks for oil". The majority of citizens are passive, but if you ask, I'm sure they'd like more laws protecting privacy so they don't have to make a full-time job out of it.
Yeah! And I don't see the problem with sweatshops either... I mean, it's easy to find out that GAP/Nike/Banana Republic/Old Navy all exploit sweatshop labor. Obviously people make the choice each time they shop that cheap, fashionable clothes are more important than human rights... It's the free market working, Yeah baby! Of course, people don't make such decisions, because they don't have the time to investigate each purchase. They count on laws and ethics to protect them from supporting such behavior (which it doesn't). If the previous argument holds, then there's no need for the FDA... we can all investigate each resturaunt ourselves beforehand to find out if the meat is rancid or the employees washed their hands. How silly of me to throw a 'hissy fit' for wanting clean food. And what Free Market? Farm subsidies, corporate tax breaks, etc? We haven't yet had a free market to try out.
Absolutely! Unfortunately, most companies, backed by our loving government, forbid unionization. Ad to that NAFTA, the WTO, and the Bush's future Fast Track, and you have a labor movement so crippled that I wonder how it could be effective. Your workers strike? Move the whole operation to Bangelor or China, put 20,000 US workers in the unemployment line, and pat yourself on the back for increasing shareholder's profits at the same time. What we need, if we are not going to stand for these types of abuses, is to oppose and repeal trade agreements that weaken labor rights, and to pass a law such that no employer can prevent, discourage, or punish an employee from/for joining a union.
Globalism is great for multinational corporations. Big business depends on cheap labor as a commodity to be sought out and exploited. Globalism removes the weak boundaries that might prevent a company from laying off it's entire domestic workforce and shipping it's jobs and money overseas... ala Nike. A strict utalitarian might argue that it betters the lives of workers in other nations by giving them a slightly better wage. Given the current climate of flag-wavin, USA-cheerin americans, it's hard to imagine people getting excited about allowing more US workers to get the axe just so that corporations can improve their bottom line.