Curse

samarium · Jul 12, 2005, 06:21 PM // 18:21

Quote:

and blaming Donald Trump for your lot in life.

I blame his hairpiece. You know, they had a camera shot of him from straight above, and I could swear I saw the face of Satan.

-sam

Edge Martinez · Jul 12, 2005, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skean Dau

Whoa...back off the rich guy!!!!

What is wrong with being rich? Or getting richer???? People really have to stop blaming their lot in life on everyone but themselves!
...
They are horrors in our world that are beyond imagination, but rich people getting as rich as they can through legal means and hard work is not one of them. It might piss you off, or make you jealous, but lets not cloud the issue.

Well whoop de doo... congratulations on your success. It was completely irrelevant to what I typed, but congratulations anyway.

All I said was that some rich guy gets richer while someone makes minimum wage. Nothing more, nothing less. Go re-read my post again if you have doubts. The one thing I disagreed with was the minimum wage not changing in almost 10 years, but I did not even go into that in detail.

The fact that you took my responding to the OP so personally is your own doing. I doubt there is a single person on this board who is pissed of or jealous of you, but if thinking that makes you feel better... hey, enjoy the day.

nineinchnails · Jul 12, 2005, 06:23 PM // 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mormegil

The problem is: there's no such thing as "ethic" in politics or economics. Most of us won't admit a system is showing is age until they're kicked in the face by the events. Capitalism is failing mostly because people are exploiting other people, and as years pass by, this economical system is not ensuring what he was to in the first place: a worldwide wealth.

Capitalism is not failing, because it exploits natural human greed. That's what makes it more productive than communism, socialism, or any system that has been tried so far. I'm not saying it is ideal. I wish that a more equitable system worked as well or better, but there is no denying the power of Capitalism.

As far as farming sweatshops, I don't know whether the wages are good or poor considering the alternatives. I know a lot of people would like to get paid for the time they spend playing a game. As long as the items/gold are not duped, I don't see how it hurts the game economy.

Damon Windwalker · Jul 12, 2005, 06:24 PM // 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mormegil

Yes, it is an ethical statement.

The problem is it's an ethical statement based on emotion, not on fact.

You judge this compared to the livign conditions and pay wages that you are familiar with. neither of these hold true everywhere in the world.

Could someone survive on $.50 per hour in America or Canada? No, they couldn't. But in China and other countries? That's a good amount of money.

You forget that the economies match the costs of living. In America groceries for a family of 4 may run about $400 (or more) per month. In China, as someone pointed out, it's not even $100.

You are upset because you are making an unrealistic comparison - you need to take into account the state of economy and cost of living in other countries as well. Without being realistic, your righteous indignation is not only uninformed, but misdirected.

Do you even know how much money people make in China on average?

In 2001, farmers earned about $285(us) per year.
http://www.china.org.cn/english/BAT/28231.htm

In 2001, the average urban resident in Zhejiang Province (ranked 3rd highest in income in China) earns $1,261 per year.
http://english1.people.com.cn/200202...13_90387.shtml

In light of that - does $150 per month really sound all that bad????? Explain again how they are being so horribly exploited?

Diomedes · Jul 12, 2005, 06:30 PM // 18:30

Quote:

2- These people don't really have a choice. If you establish a factory in Asia, Africa, or in the ex-communist Europe and look for workers, you're the one who decides the price of labor. They're in no position to negotiate. You have powers similar to those of the ancients feudal lords. Since they have no choice, if you pay ridiculously low salaries, you're violating their rights, plain and simple, to make more profit. We see that everywhere, everyday. It is indifference, not cruelty.

I challenge you to find me some evidence that these employers have monopsony powers. Show me I'm wrong.

-Diomedes

Skean Dau · Jul 12, 2005, 06:30 PM // 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge Martinez

Well whoop de doo... congratulations on your success. It was completely irrelevant to what I typed, but congratulations anyway.

All I said was that some rich guy gets richer while someone makes minimum wage. Nothing more, nothing less. Go re-read my post again if you have doubts. The one thing I disagreed with was the minimum wage not changing in almost 10 years, but I did not even go into that in detail.

The fact that you took my responding to the OP so personally is your own doing. I doubt there is a single person on this board who is pissed of or jealous of you, but if thinking that makes you feel better... hey, enjoy the day.

The fact that you included me with the "rich" is funny...never said that. Even more funny is the fact that you assumed I thought people would be pissed or jelous of me....got a good laugh at that one.....

My post is ONLY based on your "rich getting richer" comment, so I dont need to re-read your post.

Your parting shots at me was not only innacurate but totally uncalled for....go back to your pork rinds.

Gwenhywar · Jul 12, 2005, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dumachum

Heres a novel idea. How about Blizzard grow some balls and block all out of U.S. IP's?

right, americans are the only ones playing online games - typical.

I actually find it amusing that people in poor countries can profit like that from rich but lazy gamers who have nowhere else to waste their money but buy ingame items for real $ ... really, playing a game 12h/day is nowhere near sweating in some dusty factory or on a field under scorching sun for a person that has to earn his living somehow, isn't it? And 150$/month salary is ok in many poor countries, in comparison with their price levels ...

I would not mind at all if someone paid me for playing GW

Mormegil · Jul 12, 2005, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by nineinchnails

Capitalism is not failing, because it exploits natural human greed. That's what makes it more productive than communism, socialism, or any system that has been tried so far. I'm not saying it is ideal. I wish that a more equitable system worked as well or better, but there is no denying the power of Capitalism.

Don't take me as an arrogant guy who wants to teach anyone anything, but you're completely wrong on the interpretation of capitalism. You don't have a different opinion, it's just wrong in its essence.

There's an interesting book, "Calvinism and Capitalism", which explains very well which culture our economical system has rooted in. The first, 360 degrees capitalist were protestant people, calvinist people mostly, who thought amassing riches was actually a sign of God's grace, the demonstration that God was favoring you. So it was not only the reward for hard labor, but something entirely different.

The poor, on the other hand, was the one to blame. An unlucky person, dressed with rags was also considered lazy and not worthy of God's love. Greed was totally out of this picture, because capitalists re-invested most of their profit. It was just work, hard work and the wish to achieve success.

Greed came later, by the people who exploited this system in an unpredicted way.

samarium · Jul 12, 2005, 06:35 PM // 18:35

Quote:

go back to your pork rinds.

So that's what a flame smells like.

-sam

stumpy · Jul 12, 2005, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Eet ... I don't believe thats what Old Sock is getting at,

As Algren Cole posted the economy isn't relative to what we are accustomed to. Being able to feed your family and still save 5000 yen per month is quite a decent wage. Our opinion on child labour is based on our western culture. When I was in my early teens like many other I had a paper route. I would get paid 50 dollars every 2 weeks. But I had the choice to quit, just as these kids do. That is why it is not really child labour.

1. They ARE being paid a wage that is about equivlient to a full time walmart employee (more than I was making relatively speaking)
2. They have the option to leave ... and are not bound to stay (not slaves)

The fact that they live in a poor economy does not bear them the title of sweatshops because in reality .... lets do a comparitive analysis: (sample stats from 2004)

Average yearly wages:

American National Average : $39,416 USD
British Columbia Canada: 37,800 CDN
average full-time Walmart employee: 23,000 CDN
China: 22,446 Yuan
Japan: 5,530,000 Yen

Using Oanda's currency converter heres how we all level out in American dollars:

American National Average: $39,416 USD
BC average: 31,080.4 USD
BC Walmart Fulltime employee 18,911.4 USD
China: 2,886.13 USD
$150/per month child labourer: 1800 USD in china
Japan: 49,467.8 USD

Notice the difference in the relativity between the three predominent countries versus the third world economy of china. Another interesting note is that if those kids go on to graduate with some sort of a computer science degree in hong kong they have the potential of earning in the top 10th percentile of wages at about 170,000 USD ... ironic isnt it. ANd as stated above the economy in Japan actually precedes our own economy.

It is kinda funny that in this child labour is being discussed over when our own economy has its issues here we can see. I used to work at Walmart 4 years ago before I worked in the Tech industry ... I still have friends at Walmart ... I just thought I might post some stats and comparisons from 2004 that you can go off of.

*holds strike banner 'walmart is a labour slaver money shaver' employee equality or bust!*

Dalia · Jul 12, 2005, 06:40 PM // 18:40

I posted the link because I believe gamers should be informed. This is the only response I'm going to make to this thread.

Once upon a time there lived two young men….

Rex was raised in an affluent country. His family lived comfortably and enjoyed the latest technology. Rex began gaming at a young age. During an “adventure vacation,” Rex met Sam.

Sam lived in an impoverished country. His was a family of several generations – ten people living in one small structure. While the home had indoor plumbing and electricity, a rarity in his community, the family struggled to survive. Sometimes their daily meal consisted of little more than rice. Only one of the children was lucky enough to go to school. That wasn’t Sam.

During his years of gaming, Rex had discovered the use of bots. When he went of to college with a brand new computer system, Rex got an idea.

Rex mailed Sam with a proposal. He would send Sam several computers. Sam and others from his village would click a mouse for 10 hours a day, for which Rex would pay each $5.00. Rex would take the “products” they generated and sell them for $3,000.00 a day. Sam agreed.

Thanks to this arrangement, Sam’s family was able to eat more than once a day. They still could not afford healthcare of any sort. They still could not afford to fix their leaky roof. They still could not afford to send any of their other children to school. But they no longer had to worry about starving. They lived with poverty, ignorance and disease – but they didn’t starve. They were grateful for that.

Life in Sam’s village was forever changed. Many discussions revolved around what life in the affluent country must be like. Some dreamed of going there some day and starting a new life. Some resented the disparity of the word. And, in some, anger and hate festered.

The bots used in the games proved problematic for game developers and, in turn, for the gamers themselves. Time and funding that developers would have used to improve and add content to their games went into efforts to control botting instead. Game economies were skewed and many players complained. Other gamers saw botting or purchasing bot-made items as ways to stay competitive, therefore compounding the problem into an endless cycle.

As for Rex, Rex used the money generated from his new-found business to pay for a master’s degree in business administration. He bought a fancy car and a fancy house with even fancier technology and married a fancy woman. He began to make contributions to politicians and, in time, became an influential lobbyist.

No one lived happily ever after.

Dalia

Diomedes · Jul 12, 2005, 06:41 PM // 18:41

Quote:

The attitude that makes us accept these kind of things, along with child labor in general, is the same attitude that generated them.

I started my post by saying I shouldn't be posting and I think that your post has reaffirmed this belief. There's no reason to try and have a discussion when the other party doesn't want to discuss but just wants to repeat dead dogma (see also CrossFire).

-Diomedes

Mormegil · Jul 12, 2005, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diomedes

I challenge you to find me some evidence that these employers have monopsony powers. Show me I'm wrong.

-Diomedes

Ok.

Here is the evidence.

Bridgestone has a huge factory in Liberia. They're polluting rivers with toxic wastes while corrupting the politicians to turn their heads away. Employees are paid 0.70-0.80 dollars a day, which is an absurdly low salary even in Liberia.
In this situation, Bridgeston is buying a product (employees' labor), and has the capability to drive the price down (low wages) because it's the only buyer there. By working for Bridgestone, these people almost starve to death. Working for anyone else would mean they would actually starve to death. They don't have an alternative, so that this is a clear situation of monopsony. No offence, but this particular example was pointed out by illustrous economists, so I'm no smartass, I'm just quoting someone else.

You can check this in Google with little effort.

Gwenhywar · Jul 12, 2005, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diomedes

I challenge you to find me some evidence that these employers have monopsony powers. Show me I'm wrong.

-Diomedes

Ah, it's good to be an ignorant american ... life, since you only know and want to know only one kind of lifestyle, is so simple for you

Having grown up in Eastern Europe myself, I find this kind of attitude amusing though *grin*.

Diomedes · Jul 12, 2005, 06:48 PM // 18:48

[quote]
Bridgestone has a huge factory in Liberia. They're polluting rivers with toxic wastes while corrupting the politicians to turn their heads away. Employees are paid 0.70-0.80 dollars a day, which is an absurdly low salary even in Liberia.
In this situation, Bridgeston is buying a product (employees' labor), and has the capability to drive the price down (low wages) because it's the only buyer there. By working for Bridgestone, these people almost starve to death. Working for anyone else would mean they would actually starve to death. They don't have an alternative, so that this is a clear situation of monopsony. No offence, but this particular example was pointed out by illustrous economists, so I'm no smartass, I'm just quoting someone else.[quote]

Weren't we talking about China here?

-Diomedes

Algren Cole · Jul 12, 2005, 06:49 PM // 18:49

[QUOTE=Diomedes][quote]
Bridgestone has a huge factory in Liberia. They're polluting rivers with toxic wastes while corrupting the politicians to turn their heads away. Employees are paid 0.70-0.80 dollars a day, which is an absurdly low salary even in Liberia.
In this situation, Bridgeston is buying a product (employees' labor), and has the capability to drive the price down (low wages) because it's the only buyer there. By working for Bridgestone, these people almost starve to death. Working for anyone else would mean they would actually starve to death. They don't have an alternative, so that this is a clear situation of monopsony. No offence, but this particular example was pointed out by illustrous economists, so I'm no smartass, I'm just quoting someone else.

Quote:

Weren't we talking about China here?

-Diomedes

and even if we weren't...weren't we talking about g-farmers???

W O O D Y · Jul 12, 2005, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gwenhywar

Ah, it's good to be an ignorant american ... life, since you only know and want to know only one kind of lifestyle, is so simple for you

Having grown up in Eastern Europe myself, I find this kind of attitude amusing though *grin*.

you could say ignorant person instead of american. crap like this doesnt need to be posted in the first place.

Diomedes · Jul 12, 2005, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Quote:

Ah, it's good to be an ignorant american ... life, since you only know and want to know only one kind of lifestyle, is so simple for you Having grown up in Eastern Europe myself, I find this kind of attitude amusing though *grin*.

?? Excuse me? Didn't I just ASK for examples? Isn't that how you HAVE a disucssion? I guess trying to get details was just "stealth american lingo" for, "PLEASE! DON'T TELL ME! I'M ASKING FOR NO REASON AT ALL!"

-Diomedes

Skean Dau · Jul 12, 2005, 06:53 PM // 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalia

I posted the link because I believe gamers should be informed. This is the only response I'm going to make to this thread.

Once upon a time there lived two young men….

Rex was raised in an affluent country. His family lived comfortably and enjoyed the latest technology. Rex began gaming at a young age. During an “adventure vacation,” Rex met Sam.

Sam lived in an impoverished country. His was a family of several generations – ten people living in one small structure. While the home had indoor plumbing and electricity, a rarity in his community, the family struggled to survive. Sometimes their daily meal consisted of little more than rice. Only one of the children was lucky enough to go to school. That wasn’t Sam.

During his years of gaming, Rex had discovered the use of bots. When he went of to college with a brand new computer system, Rex got an idea.

Rex mailed Sam with a proposal. He would send Sam several computers. Sam and others from his village would click a mouse for 10 hours a day, for which Rex would pay each $5.00. Rex would take the “products” they generated and sell them for $3,000.00 a day. Sam agreed.

Thanks to this arrangement, Sam’s family was able to eat more than once a day. They still could not afford healthcare of any sort. They still could not afford to fix their leaky roof. They still could not afford to send any of their other children to school. But they no longer had to worry about starving. They lived with poverty, ignorance and disease – but they didn’t starve. They were grateful for that.

Life in Sam’s village was forever changed. Many discussions revolved around what life in the affluent country must be like. Some dreamed of going there some day and starting a new life. Some resented the disparity of the word. And, in some, anger and hate festered.

The bots used in the games proved problematic for game developers and, in turn, for the gamers themselves. Time and funding that developers would have used to improve and add content to their games went into efforts to control botting instead. Game economies were skewed and many players complained. Other gamers saw botting or purchasing bot-made items as ways to stay competitive, therefore compounding the problem into an endless cycle.

As for Rex, Rex used the money generated from his new-found business to pay for a master’s degree in business administration. He bought a fancy car and a fancy house with even fancier technology and married a fancy woman. He began to make contributions to politicians and, in time, became an influential lobbyist.

No one lived happily ever after.

Dalia

Hmmmm...I think Sams family was happy for not starving, and it sounds like Rex is pretty damn happy!!!

Damon Windwalker · Jul 12, 2005, 06:56 PM // 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skean Dau

Hmmmm...I think Sams family was happy for not starving, and it sounds like Rex is pretty damn happy!!!

...Not to mention all the gamers that got the gold...

In fact - seems to me like the only people who lsot out are those (like me) who will only spend real-work cash on real-world items...