Yeah... I'm extremely torn on that kind of thing. I want to have everyone pay for high quality goods.. but I just bought a $35 bedsheet set because I really can't afford the high quality stuff right now. It's all connected, and related to each other.. and yet I don't know where to start breaking the cycle.
You start by realizing that the labor isn't necessarily a huge part of the price tag...it's not like that sheet set made in the U.S. would cost $70...it would cost maybe $40 or $45. And made in Bangladesh by a somebody who is over twelve and not at risk of catching fire every day, more like $36. This is how razor-thin the margins these stores are competing on are.
Like, do the math there...fire extinguishers (and *gasp* yearly inspections of them) on a factory pushing out a thousand articles of clothing a day are going to add a penny to the cost of that shirt/pant/sheet.
+3
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Well, the unspoken thing in the article was related to that subcontracting process. Why were the factories doing that? Is it because they couldn't keep up with demand? So they could make more profit? Because of bribery, graft, and politics?
It blows my mind that a company like The Gap wouldn't have put a clause in their contract saying "no subcontractors on supply" after how many times this burned them... But that may just mean they've baked the cost of bad publicity into their business model too.
Call me cynical but I'm pretty sure most of the big companies know that they are sub contracting to the shitty factories, they just let them do it because it lets them have deniability.
"What that horrible death factory was making my clothes? Well I never authorized that!!"
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Well, the unspoken thing in the article was related to that subcontracting process. Why were the factories doing that? Is it because they couldn't keep up with demand? So they could make more profit? Because of bribery, graft, and politics?
It blows my mind that a company like The Gap wouldn't have put a clause in their contract saying "no subcontractors on supply" after how many times this burned them... But that may just mean they've baked the cost of bad publicity into their business model too.
Well yeah, that's exactly what it is. They're competing on sub-dollar margins. So if allowing subcontractors cuts their cost per shirt by a nickel, they're fine with it. Bad publicity costs them a million, but they've already saved a nickel each on 200 million shirts.
Also I'm not going to fault people for paying for cheap clothes. Sure we're all guilty here, but its not exactly sunshine and fucking lollipops for most of america still and if saving a few bucks on a shirt can help you keep your head above water I'm not going to shout in your face about the slave labor that produced it.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Also I'm not going to fault people for paying for cheap clothes. Sure we're all guilty here, but its not exactly sunshine and fucking lollipops for most of america still and if saving a few bucks on a shirt can help you keep your head above water I'm not going to shout in your face about the slave labor that produced it.
Well yeah, don't get me wrong I'm not blaming the customer entirely. It's a vicious cycle. Because we competed on sub-dollar margins on consumer goods, all the manufacturing went overseas. Now that we don't have those jobs here, nobody can afford to pay the extra dollar (or less) for a shirt. So now the overseas manufacturing has to use child labor in firetraps. But without a direct injection of cash into the average consumer's pocket, so they can afford the higher-priced goods, breaking that cycle is impossible.
At the same time, the little old ladies that could come up to me at JC Penney like "Geez, you guys don't carry anything made in America anymore" were probably the same motherfuckers bitching because our shirts cost a dollar more than Wal-Marts.
Also I'm not going to fault people for paying for cheap clothes. Sure we're all guilty here, but its not exactly sunshine and fucking lollipops for most of america still and if saving a few bucks on a shirt can help you keep your head above water I'm not going to shout in your face about the slave labor that produced it.
Well yeah, don't get me wrong I'm not blaming the customer entirely. It's a vicious cycle. Because we competed on sub-dollar margins on consumer goods, all the manufacturing went overseas. Now that we don't have those jobs here, nobody can afford to pay the extra dollar (or less) for a shirt. So now the overseas manufacturing has to use child labor in firetraps. But without a direct injection of cash into the average consumer's pocket, so they can afford the higher-priced goods, breaking that cycle is impossible.
It's why I support the increases to min wage going on in state. If consumers have more money shockingly than they can be better consumers, demanding better quality in clothing, food, and housing services.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
The problem with clothes is that the ones that are made exclusively in America like 7 for all mankind or true religion are stupidly premium priced because they price for exclusivity and their brand. I mean I will go out of my way to avoid buying brands that have had public issues with labor issues, but I'm not an idiot. I know most of the clothes I buy at Macy's, even though they're not quite as cheap as Gap/Walmart or whatever are probably made the same way.
I hate it, but it's not like I can do anything about it. If we kept manufacturing in the U.S., prices would be higher, but maybe so would wages in general.
At the same time, the little old ladies that could come up to me at JC Penney like "Geez, you guys don't carry anything made in America anymore" were probably the same motherfuckers bitching because our shirts cost a dollar more than Wal-Marts.
Connect the dots, la la la la la...
Yeah its funny how people can complain about and be the problem at the same time.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Also I'm not going to fault people for paying for cheap clothes. Sure we're all guilty here, but its not exactly sunshine and fucking lollipops for most of america still and if saving a few bucks on a shirt can help you keep your head above water I'm not going to shout in your face about the slave labor that produced it.
Well yeah, don't get me wrong I'm not blaming the customer entirely. It's a vicious cycle. Because we competed on sub-dollar margins on consumer goods, all the manufacturing went overseas. Now that we don't have those jobs here, nobody can afford to pay the extra dollar (or less) for a shirt. So now the overseas manufacturing has to use child labor in firetraps. But without a direct injection of cash into the average consumer's pocket, so they can afford the higher-priced goods, breaking that cycle is impossible.
It's as though governments have a role to play in regulating and stimulating the economy!
Individuals cannot change things by changing their own behavior. It's like trying to save water at home, you cannot make things much better by changing your own behvaiour. Stats for water use (in SanFran I think?): 90% of water is used by businesses/farming, 10% is municipal, half of municipal water waters golf courses. The rest is residential.
Same with clothing (and damn near everything). You cannot avoid purchasing/using ethically wrong products. And your not buying those products is only going to hurt you.
The only point in not buying unethical products or saving water is to make yourself feel better. That's not a bad thing, but it isn't going to change anything either. The only real way to change things is the government or companies setting up real regulation.
valhalla13013 Dark Shield Perceives the GodsRegistered Userregular
I will say when Larry Wilmore said last night that police were calling for blacks to stop the violence in Baltimore, and his response was "You first" I was thrilled. I can't condone what goes on in riots, but I can understand why they start in the first place. And this stuff is so unnecessary and could be prevented by professional law enforcement actually being professional.
And yes, I am sure the majority are. I am not condemning all law enforcement, but any violation of the trust between people and the police, and the continuation of those violations, is dmaaging to our nation.
0
Options
Andy JoeWe claim the land for the highlord!The AdirondacksRegistered Userregular
TNS yesterday was really great, exactly the kind of thing the show was designed for.
I will say when Larry Wilmore said last night that police were calling for blacks to stop the violence in Baltimore, and his response was "You first" I was thrilled. I can't condone what goes on in riots, but I can understand why they start in the first place. And this stuff is so unnecessary and could be prevented by professional law enforcement actually being professional.
And yes, I am sure the majority are. I am not condemning all law enforcement, but any violation of the trust between people and the police, and the continuation of those violations, is dmaaging to our nation.
Where I've been struggling this past year, ideologically anyway, is that while I usually feel like I have to make the obligatory "I don't condone the actions of the rioters" in regards to this stuff, I'm increasingly feeling like I also can't condemn their actions. In much the same way I wouldn't condemn a woman for snapping and killing a man who has abused her for years, lack of condemnation doesn't exactly equate to condoning it, or even encouraging it.
I'm increasingly failing to see how, or even why, any fundamental respect or obedience should be granted to police forces (of any type, local or military) simply by virtue of them being. While the question of where power is derived in a society is a question that has been asked since society has existed; within our current setup, I feel there are few, to no, compelling arguments to be made for complicit obedience to authorities who are only vested power because we say so, and who are acting in purely self preserving and oppressive fashions. Granted, at this point, it's certainly past that, given that even local police forces tend to be armed to the teeth these days and literally have the power.
I just see less justification to argue respect and obedience to police than I see to argue the natural right to defend yourself and your community, regardless of who you are defending it from. It's not that rioting, damaging property, or otherwise hurting others who didn't deserve it, is necessarily 'defense'; but if some asshole throws a rock at a bear, you shouldn't be surprised if the bear retaliates against anything nearby, knowing only that it was harmed and needs to react in self defense. Plus, more conceptually, when you have endemic oppression of whole communities based on race, income, or whatever, society itself is the representation of your oppressor; 'burn it all down' isn't fundamentally an irrational response. And echoing the concept that 'not all police are bad' is damaging, if anything, because individual righteousness is meaningless if you not only permit abuse, but actively defend it to preserve the very concept of an authority that has completely failed in its prescribed role.
Which isn't to say I've been flirting with anarchy, or its functionally challenged sibling, libertarianism; I believe in a functional government that can and should protect and provide. I just think that in the absence of a government that is fulfilling its role, no one should feel obliged to kneel to an authority that demands obedience by virtue of it being.
I don't like feeling obligated to make a disclaimer for something simply to be 'safe'. It's patently obvious that not all law enforcement agents are bad, in much the same way it's patently obvious that not all the people rioting are doing it for reasons that aren't ultimately justified. The very nature of authority being derived from the power granted it implies that the authority of the rioters is just as valid as the police, assuming that the community is granting its weight to them. For sure it's not an authority with and end-goal in mind, aside from self defense, but conceptually, at this point, the same could be said for many of our current law enforcement agencies. And there's nothing to say that leaders can't, or won't, emerge from this, to organize something functional and representational.
At one point American revolutionaries were just 'rioters' and 'thugs' against the then prevailing authority. That so few seem to, or even want to, see the irony of this, drives me crazy. Then again, it's not exactly news that the same people who scream at the 'oppression' of our current government are the same people who fetishize the concept of the country that created said government, and it's not surprising they completely fail to see the contradiction of their 'patriotic' and 'revolutionary' rhetoric and then condemning those same ideas in actual practice.
This is not to assume defeatism, though. I think there is still a chance, while seemingly increasingly slim, that the 'authorities' can get their shit together, and society and culture can change swiftly enough to divert the tide. I'll be 100% honest though and say that I'm not entirely sure what I base that glimmer of optimism on, I just feel like I need to maintain it. I do honestly believe that most people don't want any of this horseshit, want people to be treated equally and treated well, don't want to live in a police state. But then I also believe that most of those people (myself included, in all honesty) either don't know how to, or don't want to, actively do anything about it.
Which, ironically? is where I feel like the role of a functional government should be implemented; when people who can't protect themselves need protecting, ignorant fuckwits be damned. Let them gnash their teeth, progress of humanity is more important than some shitheels being butthurt about failed ideologies and practices.
I don't think it has burned them. It's burned some of their contractors workers to death, but the GAP is doing just fine. They issue a few statements, keep on doing what they do, the problem goes away in a few weeks and the cheap clothes keep flowing.
What did that lying tool of Dick Cheney have to say?
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
What did that lying tool of Dick Cheney have to say?
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
Because she pushed the story about the threat in Iraq. And was used as a tool by Cheney and Rumsfeld when she published their leak. People lying to your face is not exactly having the wind knocked out of your sails.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
What did that lying tool of Dick Cheney have to say?
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
Because she pushed the story about the threat in Iraq. And was used as a tool by Cheney and Rumsfeld when she published their leak. People lying to your face is not exactly having the wind knocked out of your sails.
Allow me to rephrase. He looked and sounded very depressed and frustrated at the end of the interview.
What did that lying tool of Dick Cheney have to say?
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
Because she pushed the story about the threat in Iraq. And was used as a tool by Cheney and Rumsfeld when she published their leak. People lying to your face is not exactly having the wind knocked out of your sails.
Allow me to rephrase. He looked and sounded very depressed at the end of the interview.
Well, yeah, watching and participating in the redemption tour of someone who heavily contributed to starting a disastrous war would be pretty depressing. It's like the entire accountability free American political culture in microcosm.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+3
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
What did that lying tool of Dick Cheney have to say?
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
Because she pushed the story about the threat in Iraq. And was used as a tool by Cheney and Rumsfeld when she published their leak. People lying to your face is not exactly having the wind knocked out of your sails.
Allow me to rephrase. He looked and sounded very depressed at the end of the interview.
Well, yeah, watching and participating in the redemption tour of someone who heavily contributed to starting a disastrous war would be pretty depressing. It's like the entire accountability free American political culture in microcosm.
why even let her on the show.
+1
Options
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
What did that lying tool of Dick Cheney have to say?
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
Because she pushed the story about the threat in Iraq. And was used as a tool by Cheney and Rumsfeld when she published their leak. People lying to your face is not exactly having the wind knocked out of your sails.
Allow me to rephrase. He looked and sounded very depressed at the end of the interview.
Well, yeah, watching and participating in the redemption tour of someone who heavily contributed to starting a disastrous war would be pretty depressing. It's like the entire accountability free American political culture in microcosm.
why even let her on the show.[/quote]
She's on a press tour. Maher tried to get her to admit the same thing and she gave the same stock answers.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Yeah but you can always tell her "Fuck no I won't be a vehicle for your lies."
When Maher was grilling her, she fell back on the, "This was the information we were provided with!"
And Maher's retort was, "The Fourth Estate is supposed to question the information to better be able to inform the public."
And her response was, "This was the information that was given to us!"
It was nauseating.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
And this is where I think it breaks down that people think a good interview will suddenly enlighten people. Most of the people interviewed are trained parrots and know how to fall back on bullshit answers instead of answering questions.
The mythical "you're right we fucking lied to all of you MUAHHAAHHAHAHA" doesn't happen, instead you get shouting matches and dumb talking points and the people you score with already agreed with you to begin with.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
God, that first segment was such disingenuous horseshit focused on optics and Fox News talking points. It's why I'm not sad Stewart's leaving and why I don't watch the show regularly anymore.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Unfortunately, no one seem to remember the kind of super villain BS the Bush Administration was accusing Saddam of doing. Interviewers need to bring up some specific examples of the crazy crap they were pushing.
Posts
You start by realizing that the labor isn't necessarily a huge part of the price tag...it's not like that sheet set made in the U.S. would cost $70...it would cost maybe $40 or $45. And made in Bangladesh by a somebody who is over twelve and not at risk of catching fire every day, more like $36. This is how razor-thin the margins these stores are competing on are.
It blows my mind that a company like The Gap wouldn't have put a clause in their contract saying "no subcontractors on supply" after how many times this burned them... But that may just mean they've baked the cost of bad publicity into their business model too.
"What that horrible death factory was making my clothes? Well I never authorized that!!"
pleasepaypreacher.net
Well yeah, that's exactly what it is. They're competing on sub-dollar margins. So if allowing subcontractors cuts their cost per shirt by a nickel, they're fine with it. Bad publicity costs them a million, but they've already saved a nickel each on 200 million shirts.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Well yeah, don't get me wrong I'm not blaming the customer entirely. It's a vicious cycle. Because we competed on sub-dollar margins on consumer goods, all the manufacturing went overseas. Now that we don't have those jobs here, nobody can afford to pay the extra dollar (or less) for a shirt. So now the overseas manufacturing has to use child labor in firetraps. But without a direct injection of cash into the average consumer's pocket, so they can afford the higher-priced goods, breaking that cycle is impossible.
Connect the dots, la la la la la...
It's why I support the increases to min wage going on in state. If consumers have more money shockingly than they can be better consumers, demanding better quality in clothing, food, and housing services.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I hate it, but it's not like I can do anything about it. If we kept manufacturing in the U.S., prices would be higher, but maybe so would wages in general.
Yeah its funny how people can complain about and be the problem at the same time.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It's as though governments have a role to play in regulating and stimulating the economy!
Same with clothing (and damn near everything). You cannot avoid purchasing/using ethically wrong products. And your not buying those products is only going to hurt you.
The only point in not buying unethical products or saving water is to make yourself feel better. That's not a bad thing, but it isn't going to change anything either. The only real way to change things is the government or companies setting up real regulation.
And yes, I am sure the majority are. I am not condemning all law enforcement, but any violation of the trust between people and the police, and the continuation of those violations, is dmaaging to our nation.
Where I've been struggling this past year, ideologically anyway, is that while I usually feel like I have to make the obligatory "I don't condone the actions of the rioters" in regards to this stuff, I'm increasingly feeling like I also can't condemn their actions. In much the same way I wouldn't condemn a woman for snapping and killing a man who has abused her for years, lack of condemnation doesn't exactly equate to condoning it, or even encouraging it.
I'm increasingly failing to see how, or even why, any fundamental respect or obedience should be granted to police forces (of any type, local or military) simply by virtue of them being. While the question of where power is derived in a society is a question that has been asked since society has existed; within our current setup, I feel there are few, to no, compelling arguments to be made for complicit obedience to authorities who are only vested power because we say so, and who are acting in purely self preserving and oppressive fashions. Granted, at this point, it's certainly past that, given that even local police forces tend to be armed to the teeth these days and literally have the power.
I just see less justification to argue respect and obedience to police than I see to argue the natural right to defend yourself and your community, regardless of who you are defending it from. It's not that rioting, damaging property, or otherwise hurting others who didn't deserve it, is necessarily 'defense'; but if some asshole throws a rock at a bear, you shouldn't be surprised if the bear retaliates against anything nearby, knowing only that it was harmed and needs to react in self defense. Plus, more conceptually, when you have endemic oppression of whole communities based on race, income, or whatever, society itself is the representation of your oppressor; 'burn it all down' isn't fundamentally an irrational response. And echoing the concept that 'not all police are bad' is damaging, if anything, because individual righteousness is meaningless if you not only permit abuse, but actively defend it to preserve the very concept of an authority that has completely failed in its prescribed role.
Which isn't to say I've been flirting with anarchy, or its functionally challenged sibling, libertarianism; I believe in a functional government that can and should protect and provide. I just think that in the absence of a government that is fulfilling its role, no one should feel obliged to kneel to an authority that demands obedience by virtue of it being.
I don't like feeling obligated to make a disclaimer for something simply to be 'safe'. It's patently obvious that not all law enforcement agents are bad, in much the same way it's patently obvious that not all the people rioting are doing it for reasons that aren't ultimately justified. The very nature of authority being derived from the power granted it implies that the authority of the rioters is just as valid as the police, assuming that the community is granting its weight to them. For sure it's not an authority with and end-goal in mind, aside from self defense, but conceptually, at this point, the same could be said for many of our current law enforcement agencies. And there's nothing to say that leaders can't, or won't, emerge from this, to organize something functional and representational.
At one point American revolutionaries were just 'rioters' and 'thugs' against the then prevailing authority. That so few seem to, or even want to, see the irony of this, drives me crazy. Then again, it's not exactly news that the same people who scream at the 'oppression' of our current government are the same people who fetishize the concept of the country that created said government, and it's not surprising they completely fail to see the contradiction of their 'patriotic' and 'revolutionary' rhetoric and then condemning those same ideas in actual practice.
This is not to assume defeatism, though. I think there is still a chance, while seemingly increasingly slim, that the 'authorities' can get their shit together, and society and culture can change swiftly enough to divert the tide. I'll be 100% honest though and say that I'm not entirely sure what I base that glimmer of optimism on, I just feel like I need to maintain it. I do honestly believe that most people don't want any of this horseshit, want people to be treated equally and treated well, don't want to live in a police state. But then I also believe that most of those people (myself included, in all honesty) either don't know how to, or don't want to, actively do anything about it.
Which, ironically? is where I feel like the role of a functional government should be implemented; when people who can't protect themselves need protecting, ignorant fuckwits be damned. Let them gnash their teeth, progress of humanity is more important than some shitheels being butthurt about failed ideologies and practices.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Jon wanted her to cop to pushing the White House's story about the threat in Iraq, she was only willing to say that the intelligence community was and is flawed.
Because she pushed the story about the threat in Iraq. And was used as a tool by Cheney and Rumsfeld when she published their leak. People lying to your face is not exactly having the wind knocked out of your sails.
Allow me to rephrase. He looked and sounded very depressed and frustrated at the end of the interview.
Well, yeah, watching and participating in the redemption tour of someone who heavily contributed to starting a disastrous war would be pretty depressing. It's like the entire accountability free American political culture in microcosm.
why even let her on the show.
why even let her on the show.[/quote]
She's on a press tour. Maher tried to get her to admit the same thing and she gave the same stock answers.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
pleasepaypreacher.net
When Maher was grilling her, she fell back on the, "This was the information we were provided with!"
And Maher's retort was, "The Fourth Estate is supposed to question the information to better be able to inform the public."
And her response was, "This was the information that was given to us!"
It was nauseating.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
The mythical "you're right we fucking lied to all of you MUAHHAAHHAHAHA" doesn't happen, instead you get shouting matches and dumb talking points and the people you score with already agreed with you to begin with.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
But then, Maher doesn't seem to know much about Russia then (Soviet era) and now.
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!