Let's have a closer look at the "complex algorithm that determines the minimum number of slaves [...] used to produce each product" [1]. The basic data is supposedly taken from five official reports, but only one of these (the one they call "DOL" [2]) has anything direct to do with production of goods by forced labor.
Examining this report, it provides nothing more than a list of countries and goods for which forced labor plays a "significant" part, where significant is defined as anything but "an isolated incident of child labor or forced labor" ([2] p.7). There is no quantitative data in this list, which means that, for instance, if you own a T-shirt made of Argentinian cotton, there's no telling whether the probability this cotton was handled by a child laborer is 90% or 0.1%.
Thus it is impossible to estimate any number of "slaves" from such data, and the methodology is complete and utter BS.
A lot of the moral judgements made on the linked site about a materialistic lifestyle don't really have anything to do with the fact that people in the west are evil, but rather that the culture in certain parts of the world where manufacturing takes place is conductive to exploitation.
For instance, if I buy a diamond ring, I am not responsible for lives taken with weapons that have been bought with diamonds. If I drink Coca-Cola, I am not responsible for some obscure branch of the Coca-Cola Company which seizes the drinking water source of an entire village. If I pay for sex in Norway, that doesn't mean I am responsible for children being forced to sell their bodies in sex trafficing. Except in a few narrow cases where law enforcement gets involved, I never even see these children.
In each of these instances, there are real wrongs commited - but the wrongs are perpetrated by people who are a lot more unscrupulous than me. It is a fallacy to claim that the end user of products of industries where bad things sometimes happen, does something wrong. Everyone has a moral responsibility, but this responsibility doesn't carry over all the way.
Does anyone really think that the Indian microfinance debt collectors who force children into prostitution will suddenly become upstanding citizens if "microfinance" companies are banned? These problems need to be addressed at the source. Moral judgements like the ones implied in this app are a huge fallacy. Things will not get better if demand for strictly unnecessary goods and services suddenly disappears.
I agree with the general principle of your comment, but I do think there is a difference between some of your examples concerning the consumer's proximity to the exploitation in question. Someone who buys a coke in Brooklyn is certainly far removed from the actions of a Coca-Cola subsidiary seizing drinking water in a far-off land, but someone purchasing the services of a sex worker who has been trafficked is much closer, and thus partially culpable, for the wrong that has been committed. If fewer people are purchasing the services of trafficked women (I'm not talking children here...that's a different issue) then it is safe to say that there will be less aggregate demand for them and that fewer women will trafficked as a result.
This is not to say that the sex traffickers themselves will be converted to an upstanding and pious life; rather, many of them would probably switch to another unsavory line of work. However, I would say that it makes more sense to use the change in number of trafficked women as the appropriate metric in considering the effect of a behavior change.
Yes, of course, if you buy sex from someone who is trafficked, I agree that you have a large moral responsibility. Not only to not buy services from these women, but also to inform law enforcement. And hopefully trafficing would pay less and become less popular if a lot of people did this.
I'm still skeptical to the degree that acts like these will actually lead to large-scale improvements in people's lives - as you're saying, the sex traffickers might find another way to exploit people and the consequences are really hard to quantify. Although some good could come from consumer pressure and boycotting, it's very hard to tell what the net effect would be. The way to get a real impact on the core problems here is to improve the cultural and economic conditions in the countries where exploitation happens.
I guess my argument is that although it is comfortable to believe it, consumers in the West actually have very little power over the wrongs that happen in the name of economic development in developing countries. Having demand for the services of developing economies in the first place is, at least potentially, a very promising source of change.
For some people, awareness of such moral issues may prompt action as was the case regarding divestment from South Africa and the resulting positive political change which came as a direct result.
And yes, I agree that will not be the case for everybody.
>A lot of the moral judgements made on the linked site about a materialistic lifestyle don't really have anything to do with the fact that people in the west are evil, but rather that the culture in certain parts of the world where manufacturing takes place is conductive to exploitation.
I think it's probably fair to say that most people on HN are aware that these kinds of problems exist(thus I agree with all points); but I certainly know many people who couldn't imagine that opening a bottle of happiness means that someone in a far away village is suffering for it.
It's true that these problems need to be handled at the source, likewise that consumers changing their habits won't be enough to enact change because the criminals who perpetrate these crimes will simply change tactics. While I said in another comment that the site could use lots of work, I think it's great in terms of shedding light on the topic of human slavery / trafficking to those who are simply unaware. The one drawback is that it can potentially induce guilt among those same people, and it's difficult to get people to change their minds about something they simply aren't exposed to all that often.
If you lived next to a diamond mine, you probably wouldn't buy diamond rings. I say this because I assume you are a compassionate/empathetic person to some degree, and I think it would be very difficult for you to separate out your feelings towards the terrible conditions/bloodshed involved in diamond mining and the shining ring that you just bought from the smiling slave-driver. The only reason that you could ever be comfortable buying such a ring is that you are far removed from the suffering involved in your purchase.
There are two complicating factors here: visibility and paucity of influence. You can't see the bad thing happening and you, individually, don't have the power to stop it.
The interaction between visibility and morality is a complicated one, but the fact is that if people in the most affluent nations boycotted diamonds then diamond mining would cease. If people boycotted Coca-Cola and Fiji spring water then villagers would get their water back.
The fact that you can't control these situations also complicates things. You can stop buying Coca Cola but, unless everyone else does to, CC is just going to just keep on stealing resources.
I think that the thing I really dislike about your comment is that you have the audacity to condemn the wrongs committed, but lack the integrity to acknowledge that you play, at least, some very small part in those wrong things happening. Because you do. If you don't buy that diamond ring then that is real $$$ that the diamond miners don't get. The hole created by your boycott has a non-zero probability of shutting down a diamond mine. The fact is that you don't care. I'm not saying you should - I'm just saying you don't. And the people doing these "wrong" things don't care either. Perhaps you could say that you would do differently in their situation, but my guess is that you are REALLY not in their situation and you have no idea what their situation is AT ALL.
I get it. You're in a comfortable position. There's no reason for you to change. You probably don't care enough about people in China, etc. that you're actually going to significantly, or even insignificantly, change your day to help them out. In fact, it's not even clear that you can. This may sound like a criticism, but I really don't care what you do.
The main element missing from your comment is the answer to "what to do?" My guess is that your answer is "Nothing. There are bad people elsewhere, and I'm not to blame, so I do nothing. Let them figure it out." I guess I hope this isn't actually your answer and that you realize that it's a lot more complicated. These people are "unscrupulous" not because they're full of demons, but because globalization exerts pressure and men sacrifice their better intentions when faced with that pressure.
It's pretty obvious that if you stop drinking CC, no one else will stop because you did. Meaning the events are conditionally independent. In my opinion, rallying large groups of people is the only way to make a difference. So really day to day choices you make on what to purchase have no effect on the system.
I would argue that the only real way to change is attempting to effect group think. Individual purchase decisions will not do this. Only organized efforts will. Meaning everyone is just as responsible for not doing this, whether they buy the product or not.
Again, if slavery is going on, whether you buy the product involved or not, we are all equally guilty for allowing it to continue. Buying the product is irrelevent.
Isn't this the exact point of the App posted? To rally people together?
You claim that "rallying large groups of people is the only way to make a difference," but a large group of people is made up of individuals, and those individuals will participate in that group by altering their day to day purchases.
So to say that it is all about groups and not about any individual decision is a bit of a paradox since without any individual decision, there is no group.
I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but my view is that I was not asked to be born under these circumstances (over population, unequality of wealth, unfairness, etc). I never was in charge of dictating the type of world I wanted to live in. Therefore, why do I have the burden to do something about unfairness in this world? It's like saying to a developer "Go fix this bug RIGHT NOW!", and then when he/she asks for commit permissions, you reply back "Sorry, you need to sign this form, and give it to HR, then send an email to the DBAs, and wait a couple of days.. but still FIX IT NOW!"
This way of thinking doesn't make sense. No one is claiming that you're responsible as in you need to fix this. We're claiming that you're responsible in the sense that you're part of the cause (or, in the language of Nagarjuna the "dominant condition" -http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/307/nagarlec.htm) of the exploitation of people in third world countries. There are many other conditions besides you, of course.
The most important goal is to deeply realize your position and relation to other people - how you act after you realize this is up to you/your emotional makeup/your virtues/etc.
My claim is that because of the complicating factors (visibility and ineffectiveness) inherent in this situation you aren't able to fully understand this relationship.
Of course I understnd my position relative to others, I think about it constantly. People naturally are competitors in this world. One person having a mate means one less mate for you, and less evolutionary success.
I never meant to imply that you did have the burden. As engineers its easy to see something broken and think that it is our duty to fix it. But honestly, we can't fix everything (and fixing it doesn't always make it better haha).
The other assumption is that the only way to change this is to stop buying a product. The truth is robots are probably better than slaves. That day is coming hopefully!
I don't think we can be expected to be responsible for the damage that a product makes. Its just to unreasonable to expect people to be informed about everything they buy.
However, products should have to give full disclosure about harm caused. If I buy something that is made using child labour; it is deceptive and fraudulent not to disclose that.
I was curious what they recommended behind the "take action" tab, but it required a signup. Here's what's on the other sign of the registerwall:
Make Progress. Get the App.
You earn Free World points for spreading the news
and encouraging brands to audit their supply chains.
Down the app and use it for check-ins, sending
pre-written notes to companies, and sharing your
progress with your community. You can also earn Free
World points right here.
To get Free World points:
- Easily send notes to companies, asking them
to examine their supply chains.
- Make a donation to support the fight against
slavery in the supply chain.
- Raise awareness about slavery by sharing this
survey, your footprint, and your progress.
- Download and use the mobile app to check in while
shopping to share your concerns about the use of
slavery in the products you buy.
- Use the Made In A Free World mobile app for more
opportunities to earn Free World points.
So . . . it's a game. I must admit, I find that a bit cold. Compare the approach to something like http://mercyhousecoffee.org
They appear to count "N slaves working for you" if they predict N slaves were involved in the production of anything you have, not the number you keep continuously employed.
Suppose 10 slaves work on an assembly line for a year and produce 100,000 soccer balls used by 100,000 people. In that case, these 100,000 people each have 10 slaves working for them.
On the other hand, suppose you had 100 slaves handcrafting 100,000 soccer balls. In that case, each of these 100,000 people has only 1 slave working for them.
This methodology seems to penalize inefficient manufacturing processes less than more efficient ones, even if the more efficient ones result in less slavery.
Yeah, anything nice we have or use is thanks to people with crappy jobs... but there are people lining up out the door for those jobs, as they offer a better life than subsistence farming or scavenging garbage and living in a favela. And the places where those jobs don't exist are even worse off.
Not to excuse the creation of inhuman living and working conditions. But better to work for appropriate conditions, than broad-brush everyone a slaveowner.
I don't want to minimize the issue, but there is room for some realistic perspective, somewhere between indifference and equating consumers with slaveowners.
The link says there are at least 12.3m forced laborers.
If every American had 10 'slaves' that would be 3.1b slaves.
This was a pretty eye-opening story about an unfortunate Chinese deliveryman a few months ago
If we are buying products which were made, or have parts that were made, by people in terrible conditions, what would happen if we stopped buying those? Does it mean the people who use to make $1/day are now making $0/day which will lead to a harder life filled with crimes?
Note: This is an honest question. I also come from a place where skilled-workers make around $4 or $5/day. I think in many cases, $4/day is better than 0.
The people who make $1/day stop making $1/day. There is crisis. The crisis is caused by the cessation of a domination-based dependence relationship. The crisis could cause government collapse and mass-death. Out of the ashes will arise a (necessarily) more self-sufficient community.
The fact is that globalization fixes countries as "slave countries." It's very easy to control people by giving them a locally beneficial option. Which sounds better to you:
Make $1/day working 16 hours per day - spend the rest of your time sleeping/taking care of yourself/family.
Making $0/day refusing to work - spend your day working on building up your community in creative ways, but suffer much higher probability of personal/family death.
The option that 99.9% of people will take is #1. However, real change can't occur if everyone takes #1, so we have stasis.
I mean, look at all the creative endeavours the good people of Somalia ventured upon release from the hands of the Evil Government and Lobbies.
You are a perfect example of a person that would pave his road to hell with good intentions. All due to failure to see humans as we really are, and our time and again honoured tradition of refusing to do what "should" be done.
Really neat interface but this is prime example of going overboard with UI. I'm sure more people would actually finish step 11 if everything was within one or two pages with fewer clicks.
On a side note, I have 42 slaves!
The survey app takes an interesting approach to raising people's awareness of slave-labor conditions, but it doesn't make sense (or only makes sense for a particular demographic) to base calculations on how many items of a particular kind the survey-taker currently owns.
It matters just as much how often the items are replaced (once a year? once every 20 years? once in a lifetime?) and whether they're acquired new or used. In a materially rich society it's possible to buy almost all goods except food, medicine, and energy in the second-hand market. And, with a few tools, the life of many consumer goods can be greatly prolonged.
Some of the most politically and socially conscious (and most slave-labor averse) people I know are low-income old people who remember the Great Depression, live with packed closets, and spend their days repairing hand-me-downs and broken machines. They aren't, obviously, the target market of the slaveryfootprint app, but some of their consumption strategies might mentioned in future versions. There might be future questions along the lines of, "How many broken computers have your repaired in the past five years?" Or, "How many worn and outmoded garments have you mended and re-sewn into something more stylish?"
There are real methodological issues here. Even so, I'd prefer reducing the number of people forced into slavery. Does anyone have suggestions on how to do this most efficiently?
Some numbers:
- consume less: my consumption seems to require about one "slave" (in the site's sense) per EUR 1000/USD 1500. (Being a fairly frugal vegetarian may help here. Or not.)
- Fair Trade: http://www.slavefreechocolate.org/ suggests that 100g of cocoa (say one good bar of chocolate) requires about one child-slave-day;
- no diamonds: this is surprisingly hard to pin down. Searching the internet suggests that the cost in lives lost in wars is much greater than the cost in lives lost in slavery.
When I clicked on this link I thought it was going to be about the wage slaves that work for me down at the local mall.
Day in and day out they shuffle into their meaningless jobs, selling shoes or flipping burgers. 8 hours a day 5 days a week for 40 years. They rack up a life time of debt in the first few years of adulthood and struggle to stay on top of it for the rest of their lives.
I'd much rather live within my means and enjoy life instead. I want to build interesting stuff, fun games, follow my dreams...
Maybe I am oversimplifying here, but I'm sure that a detailed audit of most companies could find behavior that some group would find unconscionable. I think that one could literally end up exhausting themselves by finding and actively avoiding these companies. I also think that if someone has no qualms breaking the law/exploiting people to make money, that cutting off one revenue stream would not stop the behavior of that person, they would move along to the next scam.
After taking the test (69 slaves), I thought I would try to see if I could minimize & maximize the results. So as a 1-year old naked infant in Bangalore with absolutely nothing to her name, I had 14 slaves. As a 40-year old homeowner in NYC with 16 children, a large house and tons of stuff, I had 151 slaves.
looks like they're using backbone.js as a framework. also, raphaël which I haven't heard of before; it's a vector graphics library apparently. so, I think the answer to your questions are yes, and yes :)
I have 34. I agree that it can use a lot of work. Some of the numbers didn't make sense. I don't get how I'm supposed to rank my shrimp consumption, for instance, on a scale of 0 to infinity...?
Some of the side bars give guidance and some don't. The food one says at the top rank them from 0-5 with 0 being never consume and 5 consume constantly or something like that. The bigger problem is on that sidebar you can go past 5. On the other side bars there's no guidance and the counters go up so what does the number even mean.
Apparently I contribute to lots of slavery (60) because I have lots of ball point pens and electronics.... doesn't make a ton of sense.
Interesting, I nearly gave up around that point. I think they tried to make the user experience a good one, but in the end it just looked confusing, and had my eyes scanning several times to try to figure out what was going on.
I'm slightly below average without lying - this may be a problem with demographics. I'm a bachelor with scarcely anything beyond the basics in the bathrooms, and a very limited wardrobe. Almost all of my slave score comes from electronics.
This would change dramatically if you're calculating for multiple people in a household, or you're just not a barebones bachelor like me.
Examining this report, it provides nothing more than a list of countries and goods for which forced labor plays a "significant" part, where significant is defined as anything but "an isolated incident of child labor or forced labor" ([2] p.7). There is no quantitative data in this list, which means that, for instance, if you own a T-shirt made of Argentinian cotton, there's no telling whether the probability this cotton was handled by a child laborer is 90% or 0.1%.
Thus it is impossible to estimate any number of "slaves" from such data, and the methodology is complete and utter BS.
[1] http://slaveryfootprint.org/about/#methodology
[2] http://www.dol.gov/ilab/programs/ocft/pdf/2010TVPRA.pdf