The Stanford Daily

Opinions





Comments about "Op-Ed: Make Stanford sweat-free"


<< Back to Op-Ed: Make Stanford sweat-free

14 Comments on this article:

Report as: spam offensive Nope on 5/24/07 at 10am

Noble - but the Nike contract isn't going anywhere. That's your death-wish. Berkeley may say what they support, but they still outfit their teams with Nike gear. Stanford is too much of an athletic powerhouse and too closely tied to Phil Knight to break that 'Nike' connection.

Report as: spam offensive salas on 5/24/07 at 10am

What you consider sweat-shop labor is likely that worker's best available choice. Unless it can be shown that it's forced labor (ie keeping people chained to the work-table), the solution is micro-lending not boycotting. How is boycotting imported goods going to make the people making those goods economically better off? It doesn't make sense.

Report as: spam offensive Jared on 5/24/07 at 11am

You have to consider why people and youth take sweat jobs. It is not because of Stanford, but because of the economic situation in their countries. They need the jobs to have enough to eat and have a roof over their house.

Report as: spam offensive Yup on 5/24/07 at 11am

well if the entire UC system has joined the WRC and still keeps its Nike contract than what's the problem?

Report as: spam offensive M on 5/24/07 at 11am

They are hypocrites and do it to shut idiot protestors like these guys up while changing virtually nothing?

Report as: spam offensive Bethany Woolman on 5/24/07 at 12pm

Hello folks.
As someone who sat in, I'd like to clear up some misconceptions. People in areas with a sweatshop economy ARE forced to take these jobs— because starvation is the only alternative. That being said, these jobs are desirable and sought after in these areas, because there is such a surplus in labor and people need some way to survive, even if it means forced overtime and frequent sexual assault. We in the sweatshop free campaign are not interested in an anti-sweatshop movement that would lose these people jobs— many of us have or have had family members in these types of conditions, or have lived in these areas ourselves. It is a personal issue for us. Joining the Designated Suppliers Program, which is what we are advocating, IS DESIGNED TO UPGRADE FACTORIES WHICH ALREADY HAVE CONTRACTS WITH CORPORATIONS LIKE NIKE, AND IN DOING SO, ALLOW THESE FACTORIES TO MAINTAIN CONTRACTS EVEN AFTER UPGRADES— that doesn't sound like loosing jobs to me. Please know that we have conducted months of economic research on this issue, sat in as a last resort, and feel a personal relationship to the people we are trying to help for reasons I stated above. If you have further criticisms or questions, please come to our open forum/town hall tonight, at 6:30, in the Asian American Activities Center before you criticize more. Or go to our comprehensive website and look at what we are proposing: sweatfree.stanford.edu.
Thank you.

Report as: spam offensive OK but on 5/24/07 at 12pm

Well, you might solve the problem of current sweatshops by forcing companies to upgrade current factories. However, it still hurts workers in 3rd world countries because you take away the competitive advantage those countries and its workers have. Nike or whoever will not be compelled to build factories in those places anymore if their labor costs are not cheaper than more developed countries. You are trying to take away the workers' only bargaining leverage: their willingness to work for less than you and I.

Report as: spam offensive to add to OK but on 5/24/07 at 1pm

Not only that, forcing factories to conform to various standards is not a costless process and you'd have to be an absolute fool to think they wouldn't pass that cost on to their workforce in the form of less employment.

Report as: spam offensive to add to to add to ok but on 5/24/07 at 1pm

It is not a costless processs. It will add cost to the apparell itself, helping the price reflect the true cost of production. Clothing is kept artificially cheap through exploitation. If there is a demand for sweat-free clothes, people will still be hired to make sweat-free clothes.

Report as: spam offensive Thanks on 5/24/07 at 3pm

Due to your dumbass protesting, something that was probably going to happen (sweatfree) now has almost no chance because everyone is pissed off at YOU.
Aren't you proud?

Report as: spam offensive motivation on 5/24/07 at 3pm

this author was approached by the campaigners and asked to lead a naked contingent, so those most involved in making sweat-free happen on campus were happy to have him. i hope he's proud.

Report as: spam offensive Berkeley on 5/24/07 at 5pm

You should have gone to Berkeley!! That is the place for you!!

Report as: spam offensive pissed off? on 5/26/07 at 1am

right-wing idiots are the only ones pissed off - except they're just pretending, because now they have an excuse to show their true colors

Report as: spam offensive economics on 5/26/07 at 1am

why do these newbie econ clowns think they're so smart? Aren't you getting tired of explaining the economics of this program to these illiterate liberatarians?




(Comments are meant to provide a constructive way for users to interact online. Please keep discussion civil, and refrain from using profanity, personal attacks, potentially libelous language, or hate speech. The Stanford Daily is not responsible for any content that appears in the comment section of its Web site. The Daily is not responsible for monitoring the board or removing comments that could be in violation of the policy. The editors of the non-profit newspaper support a free exchange of ideas, even if beliefs expressed are controversial, but The Stanford Daily Publishing Corporation claims all rights and sole discretion to delete or not delete any post for any reason at any time. If something is posted in the comment section of the Web site, the expressed view should not be understood as an endorsement by The Daily or any of its agents. All comments must comply with the “Terms and Conditions For Use” as set out in the “About us” section of the Web site, or they may be removed. By posting a comment, you attest that the material is not copyrighted and that you are fully relinquishing all rights of ownership to said content exclusively to The Daily while maintaining full responsibility for what you write.)