>I assume you read the cited article. Did you get the idea from that that the workers were doing it all voluntarily?

I read some of it, then I went to the parent page run by the National Labor Committee. I wonder what their agenda is. I am battling in another thread about the US media and their censorship and bias, and I am suppose to take this article at face value? Give me a break.

I can write up a web page saying the workers at the Wal Mart site in blissfully happy. Writing it doesn't make it true.

Like the other site you mention earlier, we you have a CREDIBLE news source, you just let me know.

>Sure, China is where the problem lies. But why is it that a Wal Mart or a Nike or all the other corporations exploiting the situation (including plenty of Canadian and British and French and Japanese and...) - indeed working actively to protect the situation - be supported in any way for doing so?... because "that's business"? Is bribery and payola outlawed in the U.S. but just fine when done offshore? And these companies are so brash that I'd bet some of them try to write the bribes off as business expenses!
>I see no problem whatsoever in a company VOLUNTEERING to go beyond what a law permits. But of course the vast majority of companies do not, because that costs money. And as long as we, the people, allow companies to use the bottom line as the excuse for ANYTHING they do, things will continue to deteriorate here job-wise and deteriorate offshore people-wise and environment-wise.
>
>Many many companies are now "American" (or Canadian or British etc) in name only, and the situation is getting worse daily. And when it suits their bottom line to run them from Bermuda or Panama or some other tax haven, they will do so real quickly. You see, the global economy is geared for this kind of thing. But try to do that as an individual and see how far you get!
>
>TomW's idea of mandating that corporations should be obligated to conform to BOTH the laws of their home country as well as their host country is the kind of thing I'd like to see too, but of course it cannot happen (sadly). And if it were tried you can bet that there'd be a lineup of Wells Fargo trucks at every seaport to transfer the wealth presently in the U.S. (similarly in Canada, etc if tried here) to some tax haven.

>By the way, I would have no problem with paying much lower but reasonable wages to workers offshore. But I would also like to see proper workplace safety, proper hours of work, proper insurance for the workers, etc.

For once, we agree.

>All in all business has run amok. I know you'll dismiss it, but you can count on there being fewer and fewer good paying jobs in the U.S. (and other countries that "have") as more and more work is displaced to offshore countries with lax rules backed up by corrupt officials. All that will be left here are those jobs that have to be here, and when you think a bit about that, most of those jobs are uninteresting and of low pay.