foxconn forced schoolchildren to work overtime/overnight illegally

[Sauron]

5 minutes ago, Jack_of_all_Trades said:

 

You must've been spending too much time on reddit to resort to such a 3rd rate pasta-comment. Or did you feel the need to comment something because foxconn does a lot of the apple crap too ? Or are you saying that we should stop caring, go full apathy about everything fucked up in the world ?

 

I am sorry, I am expecting this kind of crap from reddit for the hive-mind upvote farm. Lets not go full-reddit. We are better than that .. most of the time.

I think it's supposed to be a joke

[Tristerin]

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

1) Not a solution, for something to be used someone must have bought it new; not to mention that many things that are produced unethically cannot be reused. Staying "local" is also not a thing, virtually all electronics are made with materials that come from exploitative companies.

2) Oh, so if you're short on money you shouldn't buy clothes, food...? What are you even saying?

3) Uhm, again, wrong target - it's not your fault. What is your fault is insisting on this point, but that's another matter entirely.

4) Again, you don't have a choice in western society. You can cut down on some of these products but never on all of them, unless again you go live naked in a forest. Almost everything on the market is in some way the product of exploitation.

5) My solution is to hold the corporations that profit from this accountable, legally. I can't do it directly, but I can vote and protest; if enough people do it then eventually (hopefully) there will be change. Unfortunately it's not the only thing that corporations should be held accountable for - it's just another point in a very long list that the "vote with your wallet" crowd refuses to address properly because of an unfounded belief that the market will magically regulate itself.

1.) Sure, but your logic is flawed in my opinion because you are not paying the Company doing these nefarious things for a widget, you are paying a local person for a widget you need/want to use.  Keeping your money local, not overseas with these nefarious companies giving them more power.

2.) We are talking electronics, wtf is affordable when it comes to necessities - you are trying to convolute.

3.) Missing the point is a FAULT?  Lol again your logic is flawed.

4.) No choice?  Liar.  HARD choices yes, but always a choice.

5.) Vote, protest, here in the US all you want LOLOLOL have fun with your "change"

 

1 hour ago, Derangel said:

 

Good luck getting away from Foxconn when using electronics. They are the single largest electronics manufacturer on the planet and not by a small margin. General consumers not buying their stuff is not only near impossible, but also does exactly jack shit.

I am not here arguing against Foxconn.

[Sauron]

25 minutes ago, Tristerin said:

1.) Sure, but your logic is flawed in my opinion because you are not paying the Company doing these nefarious things for a widget, you are paying a local person for a widget you need/want to use.  Keeping your money local, not overseas with these nefarious companies giving them more power.

2.) We are talking electronics, wtf is affordable when it comes to necessities - you are trying to convolute.

3.) Missing the point is a FAULT?  Lol again your logic is flawed.

4.) No choice?  Liar.  HARD choices yes, but always a choice.

5.) Vote, protest, here in the US all you want LOLOLOL have fun with your "change"

1) Again, that might work for handmade lemonade but everything else requires either unethically mined materials or equipment made with those materials. As for the "nefarious companies overseas", it's largely the companies in the US that make this possible, at least on the electronics side. They should be the ones using their sizeable wallet to do something about this.

2) The point is that almost every product has something unethical in the chain of production, including food and especially clothing. I would also argue that some electronics are a necessity. Also, try to get a job while refusing to own a phone. This really isn't hard to understand.

3) Missing the point is not a fault, pushing an untenable point is. If my logic is flawed I'd love to see you explain why instead of throwing out meaningless ad homs.

4) My friend, if the alternative is starvation I would consider that having no choice. If that makes me a liar in your eyes... I'd say you don't know what a liar is.

5) Yeah, because of people like you, who assume that nothing can be done without a shred of evidence and complain when someone tries to do anything as though it was hurting them.

[ARikozuM]

6 hours ago, BuckGup said:

It’s not illegal to work during school hours in America. My senior year of Highschool after lunch I would go to my job. I had a work release so I’m not sure if that bypasses what you are talking about but I also had some friends who did the same but worked IT in the school

A work permit/release allows you to have a job during school hours. The permit, at least in NJ, was for 16 and up and only covered you for after school hours, i.e. you're out of school anyways. A work release had to be demonstrated to be beneficial to your goals or your family's outcome, so to speak, but allowed you to leave after 6th period (12:40, but you were locked out of having lunch and Phys Ed, not any of your other core courses). 

[ARikozuM]

I love how these companies always "look into the matter" when it should've been obviously unethical in the first place. 

[yolosnail]

I don't care if this makes me a bad person, but honestly don't care how the product is made. 

If it's a good product, i'll buy it regardless

If China doesn't want to care about the wellbeing of their citizens, who am I to say otherwise. I suppose the Americans would want to invade and give them some  'freedom'

 

Also, the headline is heavily misleading, it makes it sound a lot worse than it is, but that's The Guardian for you!

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't classify a 17 year old as a 'school child'

[Tristerin]

33 minutes ago, Sauron said:

1) Again, that might work for handmade lemonade but everything else requires either unethically mined materials or equipment made with those materials. As for the "nefarious companies overseas", it's largely the companies in the US that make this possible, at least on the electronics side. They should be the ones using their sizeable wallet to do something about this.

2) The point is that almost every product has something unethical in the chain of production, including food and especially clothing. I would also argue that some electronics are a necessity. Also, try to get a job while refusing to own a phone. This really isn't hard to understand.

3) Missing the point is not a fault, pushing an untenable point is. If my logic is flawed I'd love to see you explain why instead of throwing out meaningless ad homs.

4) My friend, if the alternative is starvation I would consider that having no choice. If that makes me a liar in your eyes... I'd say you don't know what a liar is.

5) Yeah, because of people like you, who assume that nothing can be done without a shred of evidence and complain when someone tries to do anything as though it was hurting them.

1.) You need to research about keeping money local - then you may understand the impact is has on YOUR economy.  And why I preach it.

1A.) Corporations are inherently evil, subject to be spoken about on another thread, focusing on Foxxconn right now.  So you want evil to fight evil...sure.

2.) Not really hard to understand.  I have a Gen 1 smartphone.  Its 10 years old, I personally don't fix things that aren't broken.  But this is where you can ethically still own a phone, and not contribute to what you claim to stand against if you Read #1 again.

3.) Untenable?  I can easily defend this.  Your logic is flawed against my logic.  Because you call it logical, also does not make it logical (this can be said either way).

4.) Starvation vs buying electronics (subject at hand) is convolution again.  You do not have to purchase goods made from sweatshops.  People weren't starving without their iPhone in the 80's.  I used the word liar because you are lying to yourself thinking you have no choice.  The choice is just very difficult.  Then you weigh the difficulties and decide if the difficulties are worth your espouses "cares" or not.

5.) Because people like me....(and you, because guess what you are typing on) continue to purchase SWEAT SHOP GOODS.  That's why this continues.  It doesn't continue because the protests and mass internet OH NOES.  Again, I already stated early on, my care on this subject does not outweigh my desire to do hobbies with electronics.  I feel a pang of guilt, but not enough guilt to...lie to myself about it while I type on my sweatshop produced items.

[Tristerin]

@Sauron you are a good dude so I don't wish to continue arguing because our views are different - that doesn't make either of us less of anything

 

Instead, we are both right.  Protesting, and giving voice does have an impact.  Not buying also has an impact.  Each drop in the bucket counts to getting it overflowing.

[Guest]

I won't go into a lot of blabla, an image says it all, and a movie provided the perfect image for this question!

[yolosnail]

1 minute ago, Cora_Lie said:

I won't go into a lot of blabla, an image says it all, and a movie provided the perfect image for this question!

The sane person would pick neither because they both give you Autism

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, yolosnail said:

The sane person would pick neither because they both give you Autism

Nah! Sanity is not an option anymore.

Just look at what is happening all around us... Now is the time of making a choice.

 

[wANKER]

'Forced' is an extremely sketchy word there OP. I'd consider revising.

[yolosnail]

8 minutes ago, wANKER said:

'Forced' is an extremely sketchy word there OP. I'd consider revising.

Exactly my thought, they weren't 'forced' into it, more like blackmailed because they were told if they didn't do it, they'd lose their job.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, wANKER said:

'Forced' is an extremely sketchy word there OP. I'd consider revising.

 

3 minutes ago, yolosnail said:

Exactly my thought, they weren't 'forced' into it, more like blackmailed because they were told if they didn't do it, they'd lose their job.

HUM... When someone tells you : "If you don't work, you will be forced to resign automagically! No work? No internship! No internship? Impossible to get a diploma ! No diploma ? Bye bye your dreams of a better life!"

How do you call that? By my book that's coercion! Synonym of coercion? "Force".

 

Why shouldn't he use this word again?

[yolosnail]

Just now, Cora_Lie said:

 

HUM... When someone tells you : "If you don't work, you will be forced to resign automagically! No work? No internship! No internship? Impossible to get a diploma ! No diploma ? Bye bye your dreams of a better life!"

How do you call that? By my book that's coercion! Synonym of coercion? "Force".

 

Why shouldn't he use this word again?

Because that's still not forcing them.

They aren't doing it against their will, they are making an active choice to prioritise their education over their wellbeing. 

If they wanted to, they could say no, but they didn't. 

That is not being forced

[79wjd]

Just now, yolosnail said:

Because that's still not forcing them.

They aren't doing it against their will, they are making an active choice to prioritise their education over their wellbeing. 

If they wanted to, they could say no, but they didn't. 

That is not being forced

That is incorrect. There is no such thing as personal responsibility these days.

[Guest]

Again:

Quote

Coercion (/koʊˈɜːrʒən, -ʃən/) is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of threats or force.^[1] It involves a set of various types of forceful actions that violate the free will of an individual to induce a desired response, for example: a bully demanding lunch money from a student or the student gets beaten. These actions may include extortion, blackmail, torture, threats to induce favors, or even sexual assault. In law, coercion is codified as a duress crime. Such actions are used as leverage, to force the victim to act in a way contrary to their own interests. Coercion may involve the actual infliction of physical pain/injury or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat. The threat of further harm may lead to the cooperation or obedience of the person being coerced.

 

You were saying?

[yolosnail]

Just now, Cora_Lie said:

Again:

 

You were saying?

And I shall continue to disagree with you.

 

Even if someone is coercing you, you are still making an active choice to go along with it. YOU could still say no.

 

Sure, it might have negative consequences, but you still have a choice

 

If I kidnapped your family and said you had to go out and kill someone or I would kill your family. That is not forcing you to go and do it. You could still turn around and say no, sure, your family would be dead (and probably you as well because I can't take risks), but you said no

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, yolosnail said:

Because that's still not forcing them.

They aren't doing it against their will, they are making an active choice to prioritise their education over their wellbeing. 

If they wanted to, they could say no, but they didn't. 

That is not being forced

They're being forced to do this as part of their work study. If the law states that they must not work overnight or overtime, they must not. If Foxconn, or the school, isn't telling the students' their rights, that's force. 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Tristerin said:

I am not here arguing against Foxconn.

You are arguing to vote with your wallet, I.E don't buy products made by this company.  That's impossible with foxconn.

In fact a brief look at history shows that you will never change a companies practices by voting with your wallet, at best they'll drop a feature or update a product.  

 

Nestle is close to the largest food company on the planet and it has had a very large and well organized boycott (as far as boycott go) running against it since the 80's.  All it has done is bring them more PR.

[Guest]

 

9 minutes ago, yolosnail said:

And I shall continue to disagree with you.

 

Even if someone is coercing you, you are still making an active choice to go along with it. YOU could still say no.

 

Sure, it might have negative consequences, but you still have a choice

 

If I kidnapped your family and said you had to go out and kill someone or I would kill your family. That is not forcing you to go and do it. You could still turn around and say no, sure, your family would be dead (and probably you as well because I can't take risks), but you said no

 

Well... I gave you the definition of a word, in english, which you should be able to understand, you seemingly living in the UK...

 

If you manage to sweep away the meaning of a word from your own language and discuss the point that a person who is given no choice, still has a choice, then... what can I say... "Stay in Wonderland", maybe? You chose the red pill ^o^

 

If you've worked everyday for more than ten hours doing a gruelling and tedious job, going back in a dormitory to get some rest in the very company where you spend all your day and then being told that you need to do the night shifts too.

Just try to image in which kind of state you are, how much "active choice" you are able to make.

Not much!

 

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

That is incorrect. There is no such thing as personal responsibility these days.

Although in fairness if you have the weight of the school, government and potential only employment option telling you to do it or your chances of getting a job are non existent,  it does remove a lot choice from the situation.   

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

Although in fairness if you have the weight of the school, government and potential only employment option telling you to do it or your chances of getting a job are non existent,  it does remove a lot choice from the situation.   

Get this...

 

China, quite literally, has a social credit system that logs everything you do. 

[Guest]

And do not forget... we are talking UNDERAGE "students".

[Blademaster91]

21 minutes ago, yolosnail said:

Because that's still not forcing them.

They aren't doing it against their will, they are making an active choice to prioritise their education over their wellbeing. 

If they wanted to, they could say no, but they didn't. 

That is not being forced

They aren't being forced to, but not being able to participate in internships and affecting their graduation and scholarships, I would say that would affect wellbeing if they aren't able to graduate and get a job at one of the largest factories in China.

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You are arguing to vote with your wallet, I.E don't buy products made by this company.  That's impossible with foxconn.

I agree that you can't totally boycott the company though they were arguing voting with your wallet by buying used, which IMO is still doing something as you aren't directly supporting the company.