Comment

Comment on German carmaker Volkswagen says forced labour in one of its sub-supplier's plants in China was not identified as 'no full supply chain transparency exists'

<- View Parent

intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Yeah I think I agree. The law should be: if you can’t positively confirm it’s clean, you can’t use it.

We should have standards for the treatment of people, and strive not to participate in or reward those who treat people in unacceptable ways.

If we have to take on some difficulty for that, so be it. Maybe if our difficulty gets to the point where I’m hungry, I’ll choose differently. But until then I’m willing to take a break from this or that car brand until they can figure out ethical sourcing.

I do think, to whatever extent possible, the change should be implemented smoothly. Maybe a rapidly-growing tariff on such goods for a few years, followed by a ban on their import, instead of an immediate ban on the import.

It’s not good for a country to create an unfair marketplace. And it is an unfair marketplace when rules which acutely affect only certain people drastically for the good of all, are implemented too quickly to adapt to without major setbacks.

Just saying it should be phased in, to minimize local economic tearing.

source

Sort:hotnew top

ninjaphysics@beehaw.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Agreed. In essence, the cost of doing business is ensuring your supply chain is lawful and morally sound. This lack of respect for humanity as a practice runs rampant because capitalism calls for nothing less than infinite growth and ever increasing profit. Imo, if you can’t afford to do business humanely, you shouldn’t be allowed to be in business.

source
davehtaylor@beehaw.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Yeah I think I agree. The law should be: if you can’t positively confirm it’s clean, you can’t use it.

We should have standards for the treatment of people, and strive not to participate in or reward those who treat people in unacceptable ways.

Totally agree.

It’s not good for a country to create an unfair marketplace. And it is an unfair marketplace when rules which acutely affect only certain people drastically for the good of all, are implemented too quickly to adapt to without major setbacks.

Just saying it should be phased in, to minimize local economic tearing.

Totally disagree.

Fines/tariffs/etc. are just cost of doing business for big business. Slowly enforcing regulation gives companies time to hedge, shuffle, and deflect without actually doing anything. Consequences should be hard and fast. Economies be damned. If an economy can’t stand on its own without companies acting ethically, or with them being punished for it, then it shouldn’t stand at all.

source
- intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  These aren’t “consequences”. These are new rules we’re imposing on good people.
  
  The fact you view this as a war between you and the companies being regulated means I hope you are never a regulator. You see it as an operation to take them down. That’s fucked up.
  
  source
  - davehtaylor@beehaw.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Wait. We’re talking about making sure a company isn’t using slave labor in their supply chain, and creating consequences for them doing so. And that’s a problem for you? You think it’s fucked up that a company forced to abide by rules preventing them from using slave labor?
    
    source
    intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I’ve already explained my position and you’ve already demonstrated an unwillingness to interpret what I say generously. You’ll get no more conversation with me until you stop trying to trap me.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments