Replies

I felt that what he was saying was more along the lines that morality and the marketplace are not (and should not) be mutually exclusive. One phrase used in the article is ‘capitalism without a conscience’ - and if that phrase doesn’t fit this tragedy, where well over 1,000 (far more than the 400 stated in the article) died, I’m not sure what does.

Saying that a business run for profit could and should also be run in a decent, moral way, isn’t, I don’t think, in any way anti-capitalist. On the contrary, capitalism, being fundamentally more ‘moral’ than socialism, should be taking the ‘high ground’ on issues such as this.

There IS something wrong with packing 3500 women and young kids into a totally unsafe structure and working them until the building collapses on top of them - from both a moral perspective (clearly) and also a capitalistic one (such an event obviously doesn’t make the business owner any money).

Are you sure it doesn't make any money? If the operations in the building produced enough revenue to exceed all costs (including construction) then the owners were making money on it.

Years ago I worked on a project for major American corporation to build a plant in Mexico. That plant was built to American standards for fire protection and safety. I have a friend currently trying to upgrade Chinese manufacturing facilities to American standards. In both facilities, wages are not comparable to those in the US but if they were, they would not have been built. Additionally, the air compressors made in Mexico and the paints made in Chia are primarily for those markets.

Whoever owned and built the facilities in Bangladesh is responsible, not capitalism. We have no idea what the building standards are and which were violated, what officials were bribed or what contractors cut corners. This is so typical in the third world but the idea they can be raised to our standards overnight is ludicrous. They cannot afford what I call “affordable righteous indignation” which is the world the Pope lives in. As the people of Bangladesh lift themselves out of poverty, they can then demand and build safer facilities. We cannot ordain them and can only hurt them by refusing to buy what they make. We can’t gift them out of poverty either.

A fair wage is what the market bears and that is better than no wage. A fair wage is the starting point for greater prosperity, no wage is the end point of poverty. No one says they have to die to achieve prosperity. It is up to the people Bangladesh to make those corrections or accept the risks based on their decision about their future.

Then it’s up to their government or the people to change that....not the Global Barons who would then have us all working at their idea of a fair “International” wage rate.