60 Minutes now. Bangladesh factory story
Channel 9
Edit post story.
I posted this for a number of reasons
It sucks, but the fact is that if they paid clothes workers more, then they may disproportionately be earning more than other workers in that country. This is because some of the goods will be resold in the same country.
If we pay more, clothes prices rise in Bangladesh too, and then only clothes workers would be able to afford them!
We pay more, they get screwed even more.
I don't like your logic.
Hmm, where do I start?
The clothes we are talking about are not the ones being produced for domestic consumption, they are produced for export from developing countries to the western world. So there is no concern about whether people there can afford them.
And not sure what is meant by them earning more than others in the country or the danger this poses. They earn more money, that money gets spent by them locally, and provides economic opportunity for the entire community.
Sure, it's nice to think that us giving them less money helps them, but this is illogical and goes against reason. As I said, we could double the wage given to them and we wouldn't even notice it in the price we pay so it's not a concern to us, but it is a lot more money for them.
At the end of the day, just like anywhere else in the world, paying them more would make them (and the society around them) better off
I agree. I remember one woman who had just been to Bali, lambasting how little the tourism workers were paid and that the Balinese people working in hotels and restaurants should make the same wages as people who live in Australia. I was floored. She was making these pronouncements without taking into account the rest of Balinese people who did not work in those industries. What would happen to them? Prices would skyrocket for locals as well as tourists, but not everyone would be making more money. What about the absolutely massive increase in immigration if Balinese workers suddenly made many many multiples more? What about the corruption that would inflitrate the industry further? People would be having to pay bribes and bidding wars would erupt for jobs. Balinese hospitality and tourism operators would hire westerners if they had to pay everyone Australian wages. You think not? I know a head chef that sadly had to leave Singapore to work in Thailand. He knew that as a foreigner, he would make much more money than the locals in Thailand and more than he could hope in Singapore. This was an Asian dude who would be paid more because he was a farang. White farangs get even more than him, just based on their whiteness. So, if people in Bali got western wages, westerners wanting to live that lifestyle would take a good majority of the jobs.
Economies are in equilibriums or working towards. The instant you dolop some program on one end, the whole thing gets out of whack. It happened when they gave financial incentives here in Oz for automobile gas conversions. Suddenly the price jumped for those conversions, making them less beneficial. We paid and the auto conversion industry that was spawned had a heyday.
This chef you talk about, his initials are not D.P are they?
no.
fact? got any sources to back up that claim?
I think the corporations (who, btw, are both inhuman and inhumane by nature) focus on following the letter of the law and on 'maximising shareholder returns' (in the short term. No CEO of any listed company cares about what happens 5 years after he or she has left).
As such - like Bill Gates said the other week - companies will happily pay more tax if they are forced to. By extension, they will provide better for workers if they are forced to.
The problem is that not only do governments do a very poor job of regulating corporations, but they also compete against each other to provide 'business friendly' conditions.
I can't see things turning around until all countries agree to put people before company profits and cooperate with each other.
In the meantime, even the state governments here compete against each other to the detriment of the citizens.
Sadly, no political party is interested in this.
where's a video?
Most things sold in Australia do have massive mark ups. Except Fast moving consumer goods.
Not being ignorant, more so being realistic.
clothes are definately marked up and even on sale the prices are laughable for the quality
Americans consume twice as much clothing as they did 20 years ago. We would be the same.
In my view, we should be getting a quarter of the amount of goods we consume for the price we pay.
We expect so much for our dollar.
And we overpay on other services, communications etc
We determine how much a worker gets paid by our endless need to consume.
Most things we buy have such a short lifespan.
Years ago things got repaired. Now it's cheaper to replace.
Things are marked up, yes, but there is production costs, import costs, rent, wages, shareholder etc
If the worker was paid more than 20 cents an hour, our goods would cost more.
Australian customers making Bangladeshi clothing is the best way to help them.
Ask the Bangladeshi whether they'd prefer $1 / Day or 0 / Day then answer will ne unanimous.
I want clothes as cheap as possible.
I trust that the Bangladeshi's will get paid their market rate comensurate with their skillsets.
I want my clothing cheaper too.
I trust that thier government ensures fair pay and fair working conditions.
Oops sorry I meant …Australian customers BUYING Bangladeshi clothing is the best way to help them.
This is wrong. Many of them are underpaid - or not paid and are forced to work to provide for the family. Most of them live in extreme poverty with little to no assistance to education, they have no hoice but work in poor working condition/below wage.
What we can do as consumers is to demand the companies that we buy from to provide a fair working environment and pay them appropriately!!
This is NOT wrong.
We are ALREADY helping them lift from poverty by giving them commerce and economic activity.
Without this they would have nothing and be starving.
Now they have jobs and a future.
They are paid in accordance to the market rate commensurate to the skills they bring to the table.
Yes we may be helping them, but as a consequence of our own greed and want to consume at the lowest cost possible.
'We are ALREADY helping them lift from poverty by giving them commerce and economic activity."
Don't try to make out that we are doing Bangladesh a favour and lifting their poverty levels by providing them with economic activity. Yes we are, but as a consumer inside a store, but i bet you didn't care one cent as to the consequences of your buying actions. It is just an externality as a result of you buying.
Wanting to consume at the lowest cost is greedy?
Why may I ask are you at Ozbargain?
What does it matter what my drivers are for buying Bangladeshi?
I am buying what their employers are selling, whether I know them by name or not, they are benefiting from these commercial transactions.
I am not saying that consuming at the lowest price is a bad thing. I completely agree on that point.
I am making a fine lined distinction between consuming for the benefit of people in developing countries, where you have consciously considered them in a transaction you have made and the fact you have bought something for cheap which just happens to on the side help them as a positive externality.
I only say this cause your comment "We are ALREADY helping them lift from poverty by giving them commerce and economic activity" seems to imply you are doing them a huge favour by buying from them, whereas it is just a side consequence.
Australia once made everything here. We should have done more to keep it that way.
I don't mind paying high price for quality goods. I have many Australian tools, all old but work fine. I got a drill has lasted more then 40 years which is been really smashed around like fallen off a roof smashed around, works like day one.
Sure everything seems cheap now but not really if you have to keep on replacing things every couple of months.
When I part with my money, I make sure I ain't buying the same thing in a years time. In particular cooking utensils… Circulon pots and pans, Stanley Rogers cutlery, global knives.
Clothing on the other hand…. Well, I don't get a choice in cheap clothing, they stop at 2xl, where I'm 5xl. I have to goto big boy stores and pay near full rrp.
60 minutes is just a glorified ACA/TT
mmm, if you know better you can see between the lines….. But sadly if your not familiar with a certain subject it can make people believe they are being told the 'best' information….. Really annoys me those shows :(
The story was no doubt the prompt for Kmart and target rushing to sign this accord three days before the show aired. Aldi and other stores had signed up to it last year.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-07/kmart-target-sign-up-t…
what's to say these companies never knew about this thing to sign?
My mother in law lives by her ACA/60 minutes, and treats the stories as 100% factual, when the majority of people know they are 'blown up' for the dramatic story.
I get more laughter out of these current affair shows than a funny movie.
Kmart knew. They just wanted cheap clothes.
It's 60 Minutes though so I know 90% of it is BS…
What the OP said, it's "Consumer ignorance".
People don't care where it's from, as long as it's CHEAP.
Start voting with your dollar to see some real change in this world.
With regards to really low manufacturing wages and safety standards, it really is the fault of the corporations.
A Canadian researcher looked into cheap clothing and found that for a $14 shirt purchased at a popular fashion store, only $0.12 of the money went to labour costs and $0.07 to factory overhead. Now would consumers complain if they doubled the wage for a shirt to $0.24 and the shirt cost $14.12? Highly unlikely. They could probably even increase the cost of the shirt to $15 or something, give most of the extra money to the workers, the rest to improving the factory, and people would still buy! By the way, on the very same $14 shirt, about $6 was pure profit.