Buyer Beware

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Daredove wrote:"Just for instance, in Pakistan in 2003 the average income was about $2000. If a company were to go in and pay all its workers $4000, that would make the workers very well off, but that's poverty level wages for us in the States"

The I.L.O. wrote this about the child labor conditions in Sialkot:
FYI-Rs 800 =17US$
the children’s average work time is nine hours a day and their monthly income ranges between Rs780 and Rs1,733 (according to age and experience). ILO project manager (Sialkot) Mian Muhammad Binyamin told journalists that a majority (56.7 per cent) of the working children preferred to go to school. Some want full-time schooling, others part-time and some others vocational training.

The alarming aspect of the situation was the physical health of the working children a majority of whom had disturbed sleep. Physical punishment by parents/elders and injuries during work besides poor height, weight and pulmonary functions were part of such children’s lives.

As alarming, heart-wrenching, and morally outrageous as this may be, what would be their condition without the Rs 1200 the average child worker takes home? I doubt, over all, that their lot would be improved one bit. So, should one boycott Pakistani products on moral grounds with the increase in human misery that would create, or should one just accept the fact that we are dealing with a different culture, one that places a lesser value on the welfare of their children? I know this is probably not a popular view out on the west coast of America, but in my book paying a kid Rs 1200 to work 12 hours a day sure beats watching him starve to death on the sidewalk.

I find it interesting that people decry imperialism in all its forms, unless it is a cultural imperialism designed to make the "natives" more like the "enlightened" westerners. Then it seems to be okay.

[Cavebear58]

12345

[SteveB]

The thread that will never really end. This would be a hoot if it had to be in three word posts. The OP was giving all of us a gentle reminder to be aware of what we are getting, and how we are getting it.
Country of origin should only matter to one who is looking for that cachet. There are good pipe makers in Canada, the U.S., England, and Scotland. I live in the U.S. and generally by U.S. and Canadian goods. My Bagpipe is made in Scotland. I like the sound of Dunbars (Canada), Atherton (U.S.), but love the feel and sound of Shepherds (Scotland). They are all Great Highland Bagpipes. I chose Fife, Scotland as the source of them for the instrument, not for the location of the business. Almost all of my buying descisions occur after much research and thought.
BTW - Like CajunScot, I too always want to know the source of information, it is a part of the breed of genealogists and historians. Just like on this forum "If there's no pictures, it didn't happen", a historian or genealogist "If there is no documentation, it is very unlikely"

Slainte

[sathor]

BTW - Like CajunScot, I too always want to know the source of information, it is a part of the breed of genealogists and historians. Just like on this forum "If there's no pictures, it didn't happen", a historian or genealogist "If there is no documentation, it is very unlikely"

I have science background. It pretty much is along the lines of "if its not proven, you can make crap up, as long as it fits and hasn't been disproven"

There are theories I've seen the make a good argument for a nuke core for the Earth. Not the prevalent theory, but can't really disprove it.

[beloitpiper]

I find it interesting that people decry imperialism in all its forms, unless it is a cultural imperialism designed to make the "natives" more like the "enlightened" westerners. Then it seems to be okay.

This is something I have been fighting for years.

[Chas]

While I agree with you, I don't know who these people are; if their business practises are unethical, they are certainly not going to tell me about it.

Just because it is illegal in the US, does not mean that it is illegal everywhere. I will not be made to feel as if I am committing a cardinal sin for purchasing an article that is made legally in its country of origin. If memory serves it is the large multinationals that stand accused of exploiting third-world populations not a small company in the developing world trying to break into the western market. Nike comes to mind. 'Just do it' Well they have done it, all over the third world.

All because it is legal in the country of origin does not mean that as a consumer that you don't have a certain amount of moral obligation.

Duchess - How, oh how are we supposed to know? If a vendor sources goods from unethical manufacturers, how am I, the consumer, supposed to know? All of us live on trust every day. We trust our doctors, our lawyers, our plumbers, our street sweepers. We trust everybody. So when a vendor says that he only sells goods manufactured in the US, we trust that he is telling the truth. How do we know? We don't - we trust.

Which raises the second point. Why should I, living in the UK, buy goods produced in the US. Would it not be more ethical for me to spend my money in an economy that needs it, rather in an economy that doesn't. Or would anybody argue that the Pakistani economy is in a better position than the economy of the US.

Lastly, and I think the most telling point, morals are not universal. They vary on a day to day, moment to moment and place to place basis. They even vary within families. There are very few husbands and wives that agree totally about everything. All the events in a person's life add up to produce a set of personal morals.

I go back to my first contention.

I will not be made to feel as if I am committing a cardinal sin for purchasing an article that is made legally in its country of origin.

If the goods are produced legally and no laws have been broken as to manufacture or export or import or sale, who am I to say that they have not been made ethically.

More to the point - How am I going to know?

Regards

Chas

[Tobus]

If the goods are produced legally and no laws have been broken as to manufacture or export or import or sale, who am I to say that they have not been made ethically.

I hesitate to get involved with this discussion because emotions are running strong here, but I wanted to respond to this statement if I may.

We should never confuse "laws" with "ethics" or "morality". There are plenty of unethical actions that are perfectly legal, as well as plenty of ethical actions that are illegal. Some (myself included) would even argue that the majority of laws themselves are unethical, as they are an intrusion into our private lives and our societal interactions. If I pay a 12-year old neighbor's kid to mow my lawn so he can afford to buy a new pair of sneakers, have I violated child labor laws? And is it really unethical? Furthermore, if he takes my money and doesn't file taxes (which under the law he is supposed to do, as it is considered income), is that unethical too? Or is it more unethical for the government to think they deserve some of that money that they didn't earn? I'm not trying to get into politics here; just pointing out that most of us will probably agree that "law" does not equal "morality". In some cases the two will agree, but they are not necessarily tied to each other as a matter of principle.

As you yourself wisely stated, ethics are very personal and will vary from individual to individual. I think the only answer to the question you posed is that you must make the personal decision, based on what you know, and based on your personal code of ethics, as to whether to purchase from a company or not. You cannot possibly know whether their business practices are 100% ethical. Nor is it your moral burden to investigate every single aspect of their business before buying from them. Such a requirement would be, for obvious reasons, impractical.

But when information does come to light about a particular company, it should not be ignored. Each person will have to judge on their own whether they feel the company is up to their standards of ethics, and whether that company deserves some of the person's hard-earned money.

All that is to say, Chas, that I pretty much agree with you.

[RockyR]

snip...

So, if "the point of the thread was that businesses STEALING pictures and STEALING descriptions and STEALING designs who PURPOSEFULLY mislead customers are theives", then I'm afraid I would have to say that people USING business names that MISLEAD customers are UNETHICAL though possibly not THIEVES.

Then the question becomes, if I come across a company that has a great range of products, exactly what I am after AND very reasonably priced, but there's something about their business that I consider is unethical, shall I buy from them?

And that's where my point about hypocrisy came in - because it seems on here that if the company is based in Pakistan then the answer is no, but if they are based in California then the answer is yes.

Oh the complexities of moral dilemmas.

Cheers, Graham.

Good debate (although getting off topic)...

So effectively, you'd believe ANY company not based in Scotland or Ireland or Wales that uses the following words is being 'unethical'... Irish/Ireland, Scottish/Scotland, Highland, Gaelic, Celtic, Wales/Welsh. I just can't buy it. There are HUNDREDS of stores in America named 'The Irish Shop'. There's practically one in every county in every state(there was one across the street from my old shop). Do all their customers really believe that they are based in Ireland? Might it be believed that the majority of their products COME from Ireland? I'd probably make that leap if I didn't know every single fact.

Also, my point of showing different company names is that there are companies in BOTH US AND Pakistan that use 'highland' in the name. I noticed you didn't pick on the Pakistani company with Highland in the name.

I think we'll have to 'agree to disagree' on the name thing... at least to degrees.

My issue isn't so much with the name of the company (although your points are noted), so much as with the actual product you purchase from them. When they steal the image, description and design, they're LYING to me about the product. When someone uses an Irish or Scottish sounding name, unless they lie about their physical address on their 'contact us' page, they're not lying, just using a creative company name to invoke images of Scotland or Ireland. Also, they're not trying to trade as if they ARE Scotland or Ireland, so I don't agree with the 'Champaign' anaolgy. I'd be MORE apt to agree with that analogy if the products they carry were made outside Scotland or Ireland (like Pakistan) and they were to try to pass them off as 'Authentic Tartan... Designed in Scotland'. Hmmm... I've seen kilts with that tag.

At this point, I think we should agree to disagree and yield the floor to those still discussing the topic at hand.



***on a SIDE note, I'm very pleased that for the most part, the thread has remained civil and we're discussing polarized views as adults. That isn't a backhanded jab at anyone... just an honest compliment to people here.

[WClarkB]

Just before we get too xenophobic and racist, we should remember that, with the exception of a notable few, it is not the Pakistanis who are selling to us. Quite often it is our own people, our own countrymen, who source their goods worldwide.

If they don't buy it in China, then they buy it in Pakistan.

Then they sell it to us.

And then we buy it.

Hopefully, it is like our first cars. We bought any old rubbish, just to have wheels. Or just to have a hair sporran; or just to have a PC; or just to have coloured hose. In time we will buy a better car or a better sporran, a better jacket or better hose.

But for now, we should look at the people selling, not the people making.

Regards

Chas

I think I would have no objection if it were advertised, sold and shipped from elsewhere. As you say, it is the local seller who is providing the deception

[sathor]

Chas does have a point. Researching beyond a certain degree is pointless. If I wanted to research a bottle of hot sauce, and I find it is made in Belize, that is probably the end of it. I'm not going there, really, I don't have that kind of travel budget. And even then, even if the farmers were all paid fairly, the bottles might have been made with child labor. For all I know, they imported the vinegar from another place that sacrifices chickens in the field to appease the rain gods. There is only so much research that can be done within reason. And unless you go to the far off place yourself, you can ask what you want, and they can give whatever blanket lie they want.