The word on the street (“street” here refers to the
internet) is that Apple will start producing some of its computers in the
United States. This will not be a modest switch: The people at Apple will be
selling laptops with a big “Assembled in the USA” stamped on the box. The cost
of labor in China is apparently not what it used to be- it’s about five times
what it cost in 2000[1]-
but the shift will still necessitate an increase in cost.
It’s no secret that working conditions at Foxconn, the
Chinese corporation that produces products for Apple and several other technology companies, are awful. Last year, they
made headlines when they had to install nets around their factory after
eighteen employees attempted suicide. The incident was so notable, in fact,
that it has its own Wikipedia page. The factory has been described, apparently,
as a “labor camp” in which employees work up to twelve hours per day for
terrible wages compared to United States workers and are discriminated against
based on ethnicity.
This whole thing brings up, in my mind, some interesting
questions about the morality of labor. By buying into products produced at
places like Foxconn, we become morally culpable for their actions. We are now
financially supporting this type of exploitation. So it would seem that the
obvious best thing to do would be to get ourselves out of this moral
culpability and do our part to stop it.
But at what cost? We are not literally dealing with a labor
camp here. An employee who gets sixty cents an hour is (usually) not being
forced to earn that money. They are participating in it willingly because the
alternative is scrounging for food on the streets. If we, as a nation, decide
we will only buy products made in the USA, other nations will remain
impoverished.
Besides, when money moves into the local economy, these
conditions do improve. Wages do go up, as has just happened in China, and
eventually reach industrial-nation levels. Not to mention, overall, the suicide
rate at Foxconn is below the national averages of both the US and China.
It reminds me, a bit, of the famous trolley problem. The
question: A trolley is on track to hit and kill five people who cannot move for
some reason. You have the option of flipping a switch which diverts the trolley
to an alternate track in which one person, also immobile, is standing. Do you
flip it and become morally responsible for one death? Or do you not get
involved and fail to save (net) four lives? Do we, as consumers, buy into a
cruel and exploitative scheme, or do we let workers in foreign nations go
jobless?
Presently, this is the no-win situation we’re in with Apple.
Isn’t there a better way? Can’t we sell computers that are made in foreign
nations without labor violations? Can’t we pay third-world employees fair (if
not American-level) wages? Aren’t there any responsible living conditions or
precious-metal mining techniques? We’re talking about one of the largest
companies in the world here. Is it too much to ask for them to stop the
trolley?
No comments:
Post a Comment