• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Overstock.com comercial is 'disturbing'.

Does overstock actually produce anything? I didnt think they did, just resold overstocks from other co's...
 
Originally posted by: Amused
http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi...IID=9246&PAGE=staticpage&page_id=2440#

No they aren't. Not all products from developing nations are made in "sweatshops."

If we did no business at all with them, we would be dooming them to perpetual poverty.

This is one of those liberal double standards. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't.

Meanwhile, the surest way to lift these countries up is with free and open trade.

Sweatshops aren't a way to lift those countries up, so where's the liberal double standard?
 
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Originally posted by: Amused
http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi...IID=9246&PAGE=staticpage&page_id=2440#

No they aren't. Not all products from developing nations are made in "sweatshops."

If we did no business at all with them, we would be dooming them to perpetual poverty.

This is one of those liberal double standards. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't.

Meanwhile, the surest way to lift these countries up is with free and open trade.

Sweatshops aren't a way to lift those countries up, so where's the liberal double standard?

You're assuming all products made in developing countries are made in sweat shops.

And the US, when it developed, had it's own sweatshops. So did Europe, and the East.

At any rate, if we refuse to buy anything from developing nations because we ignorantly assume they are made in sweat shops, how will they ever succeed?

Refusing to buy products from developing countries makes about as much sense as refusing to do business with black people. It's racist and holds people down.

And this is the liberal double standard.

Free trade is the only thing that will lift developing nations out of poverty. Yet the left is dead set against it. Go figure.
 
Sweatshops ARE the ONLY way those countries make money.
Take it away from them and they are in serious trouble.
 
Originally posted by: glen
Sweatshops ARE the ONLY way those countries make money.
Take it away from them and they are in serious trouble.

A sweatshop to us is an opportunity to many.

It's only when you are exploiting them (which is common) that it's an issue.
 
Originally posted by: Kipper
Originally posted by: glen
Sweatshops ARE the ONLY way those countries make money.
Take it away from them and they are in serious trouble.

Wrong again.

Yea we can give them basketfulls of money and that will solve all thier problems.
 
They show some crazy looking people in the commercial. I don't really know if it is promoting sweat shops or not, but it seems to me that if you can take someone in Vietnam and make his/her products available to millions on the net then that person would be hella happy. Beats only marketing to the poor people around the village.
 
Originally posted by: Kipper
Originally posted by: glen
Sweatshops ARE the ONLY way those countries make money.
Take it away from them and they are in serious trouble.

Wrong again.

What's your reasoning?

Sweatshops are the only way the citizens of those countries make money. Sometimes they have no choice but it beats being dead.
 
Originally posted by: cvstrat
They show some crazy looking people in the commercial. I don't really know if it is promoting sweat shops or not, but it seems to me that if you can take someone in Vietnam and make his/her products available to millions on the net then that person would be hella happy. Beats only marketing to the poor people around the village.

It's those words they use that makes me think 'sweatshop'.
There is no way a local carpenter or family business in for example India can make thousands of chairs, stools, cabinets or whatever to fill the demand created by O-stock.com.
The stuff they claim is coming from a local craftsman is going to be mass produced in a factory. The comercial will give you a warm-fuzzy feeling at first (supporting local business) but then you realise it is nothing different than Pier 1 Imports.
I know I used 'sweatshop' in the wrong way but it was just to get you thinking.

Ohhh and BTW, bring back the hot-chick. 🙂
 
Maybe we should ask those working in the sweatshops whether they appreciate having at least something. Better yet, why dont we ask the average American consumer if they want to pay 400 dollars for a pair of nikes to save little timmy in indonesia (exaggeration of course).
 
I have no problem buying cheap stuff, that's not the point. The point is that O-stock is trying to sell a lie to us consumers.
They try to make you believe that they actually go to the local craftsman on the corner in a country and buys his weekly production of pots, pans, belts or whatever.
 
Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
I have no problem buying cheap stuff, that's not the point. The point is that O-stock is trying to sell a lie to us consumers.
They try to make you believe that they actually go to the local craftsman on the corner in a country and buys his weekly production of pots, pans, belts or whatever.

Worldstock (Overstock's division for locally produced goods) is legit. They are 60% of the GDP of afghanistan. They buy products made locally with a local story, most of the rugs purchased in afghanistan are purchased from people working out of their homes.

Why don't you go look at their site and see what they say about it.
 
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Maybe we should ask those working in the sweatshops whether they appreciate having at least something. Better yet, why dont we ask the average American consumer if they want to pay 400 dollars for a pair of nikes to save little timmy in indonesia (exaggeration of course).

This line of thinking got me crucified in a Sociology course I took.
 
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Maybe we should ask those working in the sweatshops whether they appreciate having at least something. Better yet, why dont we ask the average American consumer if they want to pay 400 dollars for a pair of nikes to save little timmy in indonesia (exaggeration of course).

This line of thinking got my crucified in a sociology course I took.

Really? Is it fundamentally flawed? Or just not humanitarian enough?
 
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Maybe we should ask those working in the sweatshops whether they appreciate having at least something. Better yet, why dont we ask the average American consumer if they want to pay 400 dollars for a pair of nikes to save little timmy in indonesia (exaggeration of course).

This line of thinking got me crucified in a Sociology course I took.

Really? Is it fundamentally flawed? Or just not humanitarian enough?

Not humanitarian enough I guess. They just kept on telling me I was cold-hearted capitalist pig, that I didn't understand, people like me were the source of the problem, blah blah blah.

I understand perfectly well without these jobs, these people would be much, much worse off, possibly even dead. I also pointed out how everyone benefits from the work, not just greedy corporations. I also asked what these people actually wanted to do to stop the problem of exploitation, which they really didn't have an answer for. They just said that it had to stop, and had to stop now.

Granted this was an intro Sociology course.
 
Back
Top