Posted on 07/05/2009 4:54:46 AM PDT by reaganaut1
...
[“Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture”] is a jeremiad. Ms. Ruppel Shell, a contributing editor for The Atlantic Monthly and a journalism professor at Boston University, is disgusted with retailers who she says have abandoned their principles in pursuit of rock-bottom prices. And she is angry with the rest of us for supporting them.
Ms. Ruppel Shell argues that our national obsession with bargains has lowered our standard of living and hurt the environment and the quality of American products.
“Cheap” has plenty of targets, and many are usual ones. Ms. Ruppel Shell lambastes Wal-Mart, saying it underpays its workers and enables other retailers to do the same. She criticizes China as tolerating sweatshops with dangerous working conditions. And if you have a weak stomach, you may not get past the chapter entitled “Cheap Eats.” The author goes into wrenching detail about the foul and environmentally noxious conditions at some of the world’s largest factory farms, suppliers to the fast-food industry.
She castigates Red Lobster, saying it patronizes Thailand’s shrimp farms. The Thai shrimp industry has been accused of environmental, child labor and human rights abuses; it attracts migrant workers from Vietnam and Cambodia who labor for next to nothing, Ms. Ruppel Smith writes.
...
But most of all, Ms. Ruppel Shell indicts all of us for supporting these discounters — particularly those of us who consider ourselves politically and socially aware.
“We rail against exploitation of low-paid workers in Asia” but still drive long distances to save a little money on tube socks, she writes. “We fume over the mistreatment of animals by agribusiness but freak out at an uptick in food prices. We lecture our kids on social responsibility and then buy them toys assembled by destitute child workers on some far-flung foreign shore.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The US could save quite a bit by closing all of the “Journalism” schools/departments.
“Ms. Ruppel Shell argues that our national obsession with bargains has lowered our standard of living and hurt the environment and the quality of American products.”
This is why promoting demand-side economics will make you look like an idiot.
She is absolutely correct here.
And she at least has the honesty to implicitly admit that is liberals got their wishes about how the world should be run everything would be a great deal more expensive.
Technically speaking, when products become less expensive our standard of living goes up. There may be plenty of undesirable side effects, but this is an oxymoronic statement.
Maybe I could afford the full price name brand union made American luxury products if Obama stopped sucking money out of my pocket to pay back his political supporters.
how the world should be run everything would be a great deal more expensive.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A lot more people in the third world would be dead from starvation.
She neglects to mention that the only thing between a child laborer and death from starvation is his job.
From an American’s perspective the primary direct effect would be that stuff would cost a whole lot more.
But you are of course correct. The “exploited” workers of third world countries are usually very happy to have these horrible jobs.
A little bit of irony to warm a midsummer's day!
Why do they care that a bottle of Hunts ketchup is $.25 cheaper? If a pair of Wrangler jeans are $5 less, did some poor child suffer because the buyer didn't pay the extra $5 at the Mall?
They just don't have common sense and consumers know it.
I’d like to see Ms. Shell go into a poor neighborhood and confiscate all the cheap tvs, microwave ovens, refrigerators, and other stuff because the buyers of it were not politically aware. If she lives, she can then explain to them how they’re better off this way.
Ms. Ruppel Shell would suggest that with the proper use of birth control/abortion, there would not be any hungry children to exploit.
“We rail against exploitation of low-paid workers in Asia” but still drive long distances to save a little money on tube socks, she writes. “We fume over the mistreatment of animals by agribusiness but freak out at an uptick in food prices. We lecture our kids on social responsibility and then buy them toys assembled by destitute child workers on some far-flung foreign shore.”
At least she nails one thing- the total hypocrisy of liberals - their causes are always to change others behavior, not their own.
Well, A) she doesn’t have to shop at those stores, in fact, there are stores I won’t shop at, namely WalMart due to the support for taxing me to pay for their employees healthcare and B) buy less crap, buy more quality.
In actual fact many of the items sold are not identical to those sold elsewhere, even of the same brand.
For example, many name brands such as Wrangler produce a cheaper, lower quality version for distribution thru WM. They do this to meet WM’s constant demands for lower prices. I think in the long run this diminishes the value of their brand, their most important asset, but the volume represented by WM is very hard for a manufacturer to ignore.
Therefore, the Wrangler jeans you buy at WM are very likely of lower quality than the “same product” from JC Penney.
Those who don’t like this policy are perfectly free to shop elsewhere and pay more.
I saw a study a while back documenting that the lower prices created by WM, not only at their stores but at those stores competing with them, has done more to reduce poverty in America over the last 20 years than all the federal and state poverty programs put together.
I’ve always found it odd the way people sneer at low prices. Absolutely nobody would sneer at a raise in salary of 20%. But when prices are reduced by 20% many people will sneer. Yet a 20% reduction in prices is exactly equal to a 20% raise. Actually even more valuable, since you don’t have to pay taxes on the increase.
There used to be quite a contingent here on freerepublic who would have agreed with every word of this article. This contingent argued that the US should impose stiff tariffs on every imported good to encourge buying American. This contingent posted three or four articles every week arguing that increasing the cost of imported goods this would increase the wealth of all Americans. Those of us who argued against this fallicy were dubbed “FreeTraitors” and were accused of being ‘stooges’ for big business and the Chinese.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.