Is it morally OK to allow large USA corporations to mass produce their items in third world countries?

Question

Is it morally acceptable to set up manufacturing facilities in other countries and pay the workers poverty level wages so that the prices for those items here in the states can be reduced, and the profits of the upper corporate branches be outrageous? Is there a difference in this and how some say our latin neighbors are stealing all our jobs here in America?

Answer 1

A good definition of moral is:"do unto others what you would like others would do unto you". Now, based on this standard, let's answer your question:

1. paying poverty level wages and gaining outrageous profit. On one hand this is not morally acceptable. Some may call it exploitation. On the other hand, if these manufacturing facilities are absent on these poor countries, then poverty would be worse.

2. US jobs are being stolen by Latin neighbors. I beg to disagree. It is these corporations that set up shops in these countries based on lower wages. In this sense, it is neither moral or immoral.

If we judge this corporate acts in a balance ( on one end immoral, on the other end moral), I would say it would be just about 48% immoral. What do you think?

Answer 2

Large American companies that ship their plants overseas to get around American work laws are opportunistic, greedy, rotten, immoral, self-centered S*B's! The only reason that they move overseas is to exploit the less fortunate and to build their wealth at the cost of people who are in a terrible position and a government who either can't won't stop these blood sucking leaches! So, no it's not okay, but as long as there are those without a conscience among us this exploitation will never stop. Yes, there is a difference in the two. If Americans were working all of these so called "jobs" how could the Latins be stealing them? If Americans were working these jobs, they wouldn't be there for the Latins to "steal".

Answer 3

No, I don't believe it is morally acceptable, but...............

If you want to live in a so-called "free market democracy" where the economy is driven by the laws of supply and demand, then it has to be acceptable for these types of business practices to carry on.

People will have a tendency to be morally outraged about these things until it hits them in the pocket.

In a western economy the only way to stop this is not to buy the products that are produced in this way. Don't invest in those companies that do make high profits from outsourcing to third world countries.

Also don't forget that western companies setting up facilities elsewhere are actually contributing to those economies. Everyone surely has the right to aspire to a better standard of living and countries like China and India actively seek investment in this way from the west.

If it is not morally acceptable, then all goods and services should be manufactured within the country in which they are to be used. Import restrictions would be imposed to stop goods coming into the country. The global economy would collapse and inflation would spiral as prices rose to compensate for higher labour costs.

In the UK we complain about cheap labour from Easern Europe taking our jobs, but the same argument applies. If we want to have a free market global economy, then we have to be prepared to compete in it.

Answer 4

Many people examine a criminal to find out why they do what they do. If someone kills their mother and father their lawyers will spend countless hours finding the root of their problems, yet the murderer is still guilty of it's crime. The act of murder remains immoral despite the reasons for it.

Just like in this case we have to examine why companies go outside our country to manufacture goods. Is it because we are too strict on them and the cost of business is much cheaper overseas?

Of coarse it is.

Think back many many years before we had any labor laws. We too were sending our children to work in sweat shops while at the same time their parents were working in shops of their own. Our society evolved past this, and our standard of living is much higher as a result.

The companies sending their shops overseas are returning to old traditions in a land were it is legal, and they must do this if they are to stay in business. If they relocate to our country or pay their workers more they would effectively shut down any chance of growth. For if they raise their prices consumers would go else were for their goods.

Is it moral to force people to work on an assembly line?

Of coarse not! It is deplorable that some people have no choice but to endure these conditions to survive.

If you want to put a stop to it then you must make it easier and cheaper for the companies to do business in the US. If that were to happen then our standard of living would plummet. Wages would go down and poverty would rise.

Now then I ask you this:
Would you rather deal with a sweatshop next door or on the other side of the globe?
What you ask for is a double sided sword. Until we can convince companies to be philanthropists rather than profiteers there will always be the subjugation of a sweatshop regardless of it's immorality.

Answer 5

Possibly.

Naturally, it is unethical to exploit children or fail to ensure safe working conditions for a factory set up anywhere in the world.

In some cases, moving factories to lower wage areas result in a net increase to the US by providing more (cheaper) goods to sell. If this is the result, setting up a factory in a third world country and paying PREVAILING wages is morally OK. In fact, it's an excellent way to move "First" world wealth into third world countries. This would include wages paid, local training given, and local infrastructure (roads, water, sewage) improved.

Most of what we currently buy comes from countries that rose up from poverty in this manner (Post war Japan, post war Germany, India, and to a lesser extent, S. Korea, Phillipines, Puerto Rico, and even Vietnam)

This is not the same as illegal immigration in the US. In the case of moving factories, it is a win-win for both the local population/community which benefits from the added revenues and resources, and the US population, which gets pricing to compete in the worldwide market.

In the case of illegal immigration, the local population unemployment rises, the local infrastructure is impacted negatively through unpaid taxes and overusage, and a percentage of the wages earned leave the local community as part of the earnings is shipped out of the US.

Answer 6

They are taking unfair advantage of those people and destroying the progress made in this country. The Federal government should require them to pay at least American Federal minimum wage and follow accepted American labor practices for the corporation to be incorporated in the USA. Like a ship is 'flagged' in a particular country is subject to their laws.

Answer 7

US Corporations worry about economics and not morality. Even ethics is a policy statement made very carefully vague so as to ensure no violation can be proved. Had it not been for this, those would not be so large and powerful in the first place!!

Nothing big and profitable accrues without exploitation.

Answer 8

where do you think those outrageous profits come from?
of course low wages but also the customer who buys the products.
would you be willing to pay 10% or 20% more for your purchases if they were made in the US?
i doubt it.wal-mart got big for some reason.

Answer 9

Its business. The workers in these countries work for much less money, its that or starve. While morally wrong it does keep people alive!

Answer 10

Oh, poor you! Did the US economy shift to the service sector and leave you behind? All those Mexicans taking up your specialty-- laundry, housecleaning, lawn care, dish washing, janitorial, construction...

Another victim of the invasion!

=.=