This message was self-deleted by its author

[Pholus]

24. I guess there is more than one way to look at your data point.

The last time I had such a discussion, it was with a conservative friend. Nice to see we're coming together as a country ideologically.

First off, as far as beating down the doors to get a job you're right. People are beating down doors looking for these jobs. It beats starvation or a life of ABJECT poverty. When you're "over a barrel" any job will do and if it pays better, the more you'll want it no matter how crappy you have to live or how much it shortens your lifespan. You just have to see your children's or your parent's or your spouse's face to understand that you'll do whatever it takes.

Look, For every article praising the foxconn employment lines:

http://micgadget.com/21420/thousands-line-up-for-foxconns-jobs-in-zhengzhou/

(The money quote is empathically PRICELESS BTW: "No matter how poor the working conditions are, we can still see lots of Chinese willing to work at the hell factory to assemble the tech gadgets we’re using today. God bless them.&quot

We find another couple showing how great the opportunities are in this country too:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/2011/08/30/20110830talking-stick-resort-job-seekers-brave-long-lines.html

http://www.heraldonline.com/2011/10/02/3414218/long-lines-for-jobs.html

Or in Europe as well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/15/false-optimism-jobs?newsfeed=true

Punchline: In the UK -- approximately six job seekers for every job.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I could spend a few hours on that one. Where am I going? The fundamental tenant of cheap-labor conservativism is that people over-a-barrel will work for cheap. So, to get cheap labor simply make life hell, remove alternatives and the desperate people will beat down your doors trying to get work. You even get to be an asshole towards them by treating them like crap and then offering them the choice to either take it or leave. If you don't get the humor in particular joke, you're simply not management material.

Again, I'm hardly being original here. See for example:

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/55

So pardon me for not seeing your point -- I see nothing in your line of reasoning that indicates that it's a good thing that thousands of people want these jobs. If anything, it's simply the institutional rationalization behind harsh conditions. So the FLA says the conditions are much better at foxconn than a garment factory? Has to be -- electronics shops must remain clean or that sh*t gets in the product and it could cause internal faults. That has ZIPPO to do with worries about working conditions. Same with sanitary conditions in dorms and cafeterias. Dirt encrusted workers will built dirt encrusted ipads. Duh. Chinese workers are currently cheaper than robots or they'd use robots. End of story, worker "opportunities" notwithstanding.

If this was all about opportunities for workers why not hire two workers instead of working one for sixteen hours straight? At $300 bucks a month per worker I cannot imagine that the per unit cost goes up THAT much but the stress would go down considerably. Oh yeah, then Apple stock might be at $495/share instead of $500/share.

But then again, my degree is not in Business management. Fortunately.