Oprah Winfrey is doing more harm than good in Africa.

quote:

---

I was implying that it would be good if the cheap labour was lost and the 'pool' paid a living wage equal to other workers who put in the same amount of labour.

---

Then the price of mostly everything we import, if we made it ourselves or paid the vague 'living wage' would skyrocket. Our consumption levels would decrease, resulting in less purchases of their goods, resulting in less development in developing countries. With less development means less demand for Western goods, resulting in fewer jobs for Westerners. Your idea results in essentially stagnating growth, reducing consumption and preventing millions from raising their economic class. And every time an MNC gets caught paying less then the minimum wage in an country, they suffer serious economic consequences as well as bad PR.If you want to help people, buy more sweatshop goods.

quote:

---

These skills and these jobs are an important part of our survival, just as the manufacture of every other commodity that comes from cheap labour. Hope this clarifes my position.

---

Perhaps where the world suffers an serious disaster maybe. But other wise no.How is Westerners getting out of textile manufacturing an bad thing? If An American who is competing with someone in Thailand on socks, they have to be (8+)X times more efficient if they want to get paid 8x more.And I find it disturbing that you would strip one of the few advantages LCDs have over the developed world. Do you believe that Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong should not have used cheap labor method to achieve the GDP per capita levels of the developed world?

quote:

---

Would this not be for the greater good?

---

That's what Mao said. And millions of people died.
That's what Stalin said. And millions of people died.Less consumption = a reduction in the quality of life. So you're saying that as Americans, we should cut back our consumption so everyone else (who may not be able to buy such goods) will be better off?

quote:

---

Could we not buy less and send them the money we would have spent on things we did not need?

---

Only if you want to cause mass inflation in that society...

quote:

---

Don't you think these people are not already suffering a serious disaster?

​

I understand there would be huge economic upheaval to bring equality to the world's population but don't you think it may be worth every penny?

---

It wouldn't be huge economic upheaval if done incrementally over 50 years. And we don't need to fund them significantly. Just get them out of severe poverty to where they don't have to consume everything they make and put some assets into investments. It is bad enough we have massive welfare in the US. We don't need to extend that to the world.

quote:

---

Although it is important, whilst the value of money is prioritized above the welfare of humanity, nothing will change.

---

Except that your method of changing the welfare of humanity results in everyone being poor. The requirements to bring the 3rd world's quality of life to the 1st world will bankrupt not only the 1st but the semi-periphery countries as well. Without wealth to fund trade, everyone essentially goes broke. I fail to see how that is the better alternative.

quote:

---

The world economy suits only some and is very detrimental to others.

---

That is the nature of comparative advantage.Why are you so focused on money? It's far more then that.

quote:

---

It would level the playing fields for those millions already in poverty.

---

So you're saying that instead of having millions of people wealthy, millions middle class and a huge number in poverty, you'd rather have everyone in poverty. Again I fail to see how that is the better alternative.The USSR, aside from the relative few that were rich, resulted in the masses being extremely poor. Russia went from a wealthy aristocracy, with some middle class to virtually everyone being poor. How is that a good thing?You are clearly avoiding how your senario results in more poverty, not less.

quote:

---

The power of money is the creator of poverty.

---

No, it's the power of wealth and assets and people's greed that creates poverty. But it is also the power of wealth and assets and greed that creates innovation and development.