COMMENTS:
Yes, It gives the countries that abuse these workers an unfair advantage.
by ABC on Mon Apr 11, 05 12:57pm
[+]
No definately not. embargoes hurt everyone. Tariffs still wouldn`t benefit the workers. The only realistic action is to make a personal choice to avoid goods supplied by the worst offenders. For example wal-mart, nike and coke. This way fairer brands can expand and the abusers will have to change their ways or lose profits.
I think it would benefit workers mob
by ABC on Mon Apr 11, 05 1:11pm
[+]
how?
by not buying from them they would have to change their ways.
by ABC on Mon Apr 11, 05 1:25pm
[+]
Not a bad idea; why reward companies who do not act ethically and punish those who do with perceived burdens? Require everyone to operate on a level playing field ... that is what Adam Smith envisioned ... not this predatory Win at any Cost mentality.
We can all make a conscious choice to buy FAIR TRADE goods, its, in the final analysis, going to take people power to change the ways of corporations and not the willy nilly tariffs or embargos of rich states that will change things.
You may notbelieve that one person can make adifference, but you would be surprised.
Consumer power is really the only true democracy there is anymore, given that the governments of the west are bought and paid for.
The reason we do not have CFCs in aerosols and that McDonalds are offering a healthy choice is because consumers demand it.
In the UK, it was people power, that stopped the use and distribution of GM foods.
Next time you go shopping, drive past the Walmart store, put down the Coca Cola, and use a competitor.
It may cost a little more, but in the end, you are the only person that can make or break unethical companies.
Good idea. We should never forget: what happens there can eventually happen here.
Wow, I actually agree with Steelhamster.
^Hopefully not in the same bed. For gods sake dont breed.
lol. Sorry guys but that was funny.
Sure they should. But herzog, have you forgot about how much the US would lose if this was put into place since most US foreign companies are located in third world nations or nations with few rights (ex: Indeonesia, Taiwan and China).
|
