Originally Posted by skanking biker
Yes, yes, play the slavery card---it works so well
GO over to china and ask one of millions of people there who moved from a muddy hovel barely eating into a city to work for what you think is pittance----to them its a fortune and for every person that quits, there are 500 more waiting in line to take his place. Not that the workers there arent underpaid---but its all relative to their standard of living beforehand---Plus, those workers over there have one heck of a work ethic.
I try to buy american as much as possible, but the reality is, most AM products these days are overpriced compared to foreign goods and with a neglgieable increase in quality. Most of the price difference is the company recouping the health benefits/pensions to its employees. SO its not like the increased price is representing a corresponding increase in quality. Thats the primary reason GM is having so many problems--its got so much build in fixed costs with union benefits, they can't price their vehciles competitivly and to do so means reducing other costs--i.e. making a sub-par quality product.
=====
So rather than judging a transaction by its voluntariness, you judge it by a self-imposed "fairness" standard. Who, pray tell, is the all knowing, all powerful adjudicator of what is "fair"---what great circle of my "betters" gets to decide what is fair? What elitist platonic guardians get to tell me when and how i can sell or buy something?
Go to the Confederate States and ask any involuntary plantation employee ("slave" is an unfair term used by the liberal media to play on your sympathies) who moved from a muddy grass hut in Western Africa to a sturdy, well-built dormitory in Virginia to work for what you think is a mere subsistence diet and a bed of hay--to them it's a cornucopia and a comfortable paradise. And for every one who makes an unauthorized night-time exit ("runs away" is another biased media term), there are hundreds who stay, which proves that most of them enjoy their circumstances. Not that the non-compensated employees aren't underpaid, but it's all relative to their standard of living beforehand. Plus, with the help of the overseers, they have a heck of a work ethic. And you can tell that they're happy because they're always singing and clapping.
I try to buy cotton from plantations with monetarily-compensated employees whenever possible, but the truth is, most "free state" (another biased media term) cotton is overpriced and the increase in quality is negligible. Most of the price difference is in the plantation owner compensating the employees for their labor with money, so it's not like the increased price is representing a corresponding increase in quality. That's the primary reason "free" plantations have so many problems--they have so many built-in fixed costs with monetary benefits (i.e., paying wages to their employees), they can't price their cotton competitively and to do so means reducing other costs--i.e. making a sub-par quality product.
So rather than judging a transaction by its voluntariness, you judge it by a self-imposed "fairness" standard. Who, pray tell, is the all knowing, all powerful adjudicator of what is "fair"---what great circle of my "betters" gets to decide what is fair? What elitist platonic guardians--the so-called "abolitionists," perhaps?--get to tell me when and how i can sell or buy something?