Asian Sweatshops Are A Dream By Nicholas Kristof

The Las Vegas and Atlantic City locations have lost revenues in recent years. In addition to the economic slowdown, these gambling locations are also facing new competitors in the market that are providing attractive choices to the customers. Though there are some external forces beyond their control, it seems that attractiveness and accessibility are very important focus areas for these cities.

Time and time again, there have been opposing views on just about every single possible topic one could fathom. From the most politically controversial topics of gun control and stem cell research to the more mundane transparent ones of brown or white rice and hat or no hat—it continues. Sweatshops and the controversy surrounding them is one that is unable to be put into simplistic terms, for sweatshops themselves are complex. The grand debate of opposing views in regards to sweatshops continues between two writers who both make convincing arguments as to why and how sweatshops should or should not be dealt with. In Sweat, Fire and Ethics, by Bob Jeffcott, he argues that more people ought to worry less about the outer layers of sweatshops and delve deeper into the real reason they exist and the unnecessariness of them. In contrast, Jeffrey D. Sachs writes of the urgent requirement of sweatshops needed during the industrialization time in a developing country, in his article of Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development. The question is then asked: How do sweatshops positively and negatively affect people here in the United States of America and in other countries around the world?

Firstly, if sweatshops were not as low paid and the working conditions were not as pleasant compared to first world countries, then companies might as well employ citizens of first world countries, who would probably be healthier. This would not benefit the people in the third world countries, who would slip into poverty and starvation.

Almost everyone knows sweatshops are not acceptable places to work or support. Sweatshops, per definition from the International Labor Organization are organizations that violate more than two labor laws (Venkidaslam). There are several arguments against sweatshops. First, is that these organizations exploit their workers. They provide them low wages and some pay below the minimum wage of the home nation. Moreover, these workers are forced to work more than 60 hours per week and are mandated to work overtime. In addition, workers are subjected to unsafe environments and sexual abuse. Finally, sweatshops are known for their child labor, where children below the legal working age are paid extremely small wages. Anyone who is against sweatshops will say, choosing to partner with these organizations are unethical.

First, sweatshops have poor working conditions. Examples of poor working conditions are factories are not ventilated; no toilets, have to work for longer hours, there is no emergency exists and minimum wages are given. There are some owners of sweatshops who forced their employees to work for longer hours but pay a minimum wage. This is proved in a case called Two Cheers for Sweatshops, Mongkol’s daughter had to work for nine hours straight but she is only paid $2 a day. She also works six days in a week. The poor working conditions actually can affect a person mental and physical

Sweatshops have been around for centuries, beginning around the late 1880’s. Sweatshops are classified by three main components, long work hours, very low pay and unsafe and unhealthy working environments. Sweatshops are usually found in manufacturing industries and the most highlighted production is clothing corporations, who take full advantage of the low production costs of their products. Many may think sweatshops are a thing of the past but they are still affecting many lives across the nations. There are many ways sweatshops affect lives, but a recent article titled “New study finds ‘more sweatshops than Starbucks’ in Chicago” explains that there are many low wage industry jobs that are violating labor laws in the United States alone. The article also reports how employees who are working in such conditions won’t speak up in fear of the retaliation employers will implement. Analyzing Sweatshops through the lens of the Sociological perspectives will help us better understand the illegal conditions of workplaces that still exist today.

In “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream”, Nicholas Kristof states sweatshops may be too harsh in America’s eyes, but a dream for many families in poverty. Phnom Penh, Cambodia is a city where, in some places, the trash pile high and smoke fills the air. For the people who live there, scavenging through the trash, finding plastic and, selling it is just a way of life. Many Americans believe that labor laws should be improved to try to help them. However, what they do not see is that many want to work in sweat shops. To work in a sweatshop and get out of the trash collecting life is a goal for many people living there. Kristof defends his statement by saying sewing machine jobs would be a more preferable job then what people do in Phnom Penh. On the

A majority of the clothing worn and purchased today in the United States has been manufactured overseas in sweatshops. Since the beginning of factories and businesses, owners have always looked for a way to cut production costs while still managing to produce large quantities of their product. It was found that the best way to cut costs was to utilize cheap labor in factories known as sweatshops. According to the US General Account Office, sweatshops are defined as a “business that regularly violates both wage or child labor and safety or health laws”. These sweatshops exploit their workers in various ways: making them work long hours in dangerous working conditions for little to no pay. Personally, I believe that the come up and employment of these sweatshops is unethical, but through my research I plan to find out if these shops produce more positive than negatives by giving these people in need a job despite the rough conditions.

Many companies and schools in the United States buy their products from factories that have their workers working in horrible conditions. "That is employing over 50,000 workers to work in these conditions" (Jensen, Davidson 279). They have the workers work from 5 A.M. until nighttime inhaling dangerous chemicals and working in temperatures that get as high as 130 degrees. These high temperatures cause heat stress, burns, and injuries to workers. Many of the factories that the United States buys from are in another countries. In these countries they have horrible working conditions. Working in these places called sweatshops should be banned. Sweatshops are "a shop or factory in which employees work long hours at low wages

Immigration. This word is so powerful in many ways. This word shaped the world we live in today. This world is a whole new one because of this word. However, this word has been used in the wrong sense. Donald Trump issued an executive order, banning immigrants from seven middle-eastern countries. He also is proposing to build a wall, to keep Mexican immigrants out of America. This word ‘immigration’ was so powerful hundreds of years ago, but in modern society, this word can be seen as ‘disgusting’, ‘unloyal’, ‘unfaithful’, and ‘scary’. Immigrants should be allowed into America because they help economic growth, America can have better relations with foreign countries, and they raise employment rate.

In his New York Times opinion column, “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream”, writer Nicholas D. Kristof uses his experience living in East Asia to argue his positive outlook on sweatshops. Kristof wants to persuade his audience, Obama and his team, along with others who are for “labor standards”, that the best way to help people in poor countries is to promote manufacturing there, not campaign against them. He uses Phnom Penh as an example to show why working in the sweatshops is a dream for the families there. They would rather work at a sweatshop than stay in the dangerous garbage dump, searching for something to recycle for change. The writer establishes credibility through his experience

Moses was born in Egypt to Amram and Yochebed. He came about in this world in a period where the Israelites were a threat to the Egyptians. The Pharaoh of the Egyptians ordered that the first born sons of the Israelites were to be killed. One of these first born was Moses, and the parents put him in a basket to float him down a river. Moses drifted down to some noble women. The women did not know he was a firstborn of the Israelites, so they took him on as one of their own. Moses grew up part of the Pharaoh's family. As he was growing up, he knew the right from the wrong, he was taught to treat people with respect. Also when he grew up he saw the Israelites get abused. He tried to stop that but could not. Moses left because he did not want

Sweatshops are a result of the struggle over resources. In this case, it is more often money than any other resource. Corporations who turn to sweatshops do this in order to increase profit. The less they pay their workers, the more money goes into their own pockets. Whether a company treats their employees with dignity and respect or with greed and insolence shows the true values of a company.

Sweatshops have always been a problem in the Unites States, especially during the past century. Unfair working conditions and pay prompted the formation of the Garment Worker

The present state of manufacturing factories throughout Africa and Asia are consistently the center of debate between humanitarians, economists, and consumers alike. This discussion is not a new one, by modern standards, sweatshops have existed for centuries and will likely continue into the distant future. The topic of debate is centered around the conditions endured by