Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Fairtrade

In Bloom said:
the idea that it is somehow my responsibility to pay more than I can afford for a cup of tea because the rich and powerful are, without
exception, foul, unprincipled scumbags makes me balk, it really does.

Its not that fair trade is expensive but that Supermarket food is ludicrously cheap, precisely because they exploit the farmers.

In our consumerist society the idea of cutting down on consumption in order to pay a realistic price for our food & give 'Third World' farmers a living income is unheard off.


In Bloom said:
There's no such thing as ethical capitalism, anybody who thinks that the workers who produced their green and blacks' chocolate and their soap from the Body Shop aren't being exploited is either naive or seriously deluded.

What about farmers who own their means of production ? Dismissing Fair-Trade as ethical capitilism is too simplistic.
 
tbaldwin said:
Me i reckon you just dont really give enough of a shit.......

I really dont think that kind of attitude is helpful - I think ethical consumerism is a complex issue and also change occurs over time.

People do care but I agree with whoever said that the quality of fair-trade produce is currently not all that high, although this is changing fast. Also, asking people to substantially increase their grocery bill or reduce consumption, espcially when they have families, is a hell of a lot to ask for.
 
mellowmoose said:
Its not that fair trade is expensive but that Supermarket food is ludicrously cheap, precisely because they exploit the farmers.

In our consumerist society the idea of cutting down on consumption in order to pay a realistic price for our food & give 'Third World' farmers a living income is unheard off.
Don't get me wrong, fairtrade is okay in principle and it's better than just leaving people in the Third World in the lurch, but it's a pretty small gesture compared with the financial cost.

What about farmers who own their means of production ? Dismissing Fair-Trade as ethical capitilism is too simplistic.
Yes, but what proportion of fairtrade consists of cooperative (or otherwise producer owned) businesses? AFAIK, the workers producing fairtrade tea and chocolate do not own their means of production.
 
InBloom, do you think people in the affluent west should try and do anything to improve workers conditions in the developing world?
 
Not much we can do, except act in solidarity with those initiatives that people in the developing world have set up.

Don't get me wrong, I make choices about what I buy based on ethics all the time, e.g. I don't buy Coke or Coke owned products, I just don't think that the miniscule impact made by fairtrade tea/coffee/chocolate is worth the greater expense and on my budget I have to take every saving I can, by necessity.
 
In Bloom said:
Not much we can do, except act in solidarity with those initiatives that people in the developing world have set up.

Don't get me wrong, I make choices about what I buy based on ethics all the time, e.g. I don't buy Coke or Coke owned products, I just don't think that the miniscule impact made by fairtrade tea/coffee/chocolate is worth the greater expense and on my budget I have to take every saving I can, by necessity.


In Bloom is that Bullshit i smell?
So you boycott Coke at least thats something..
What about Nestle or do dying African babies not matter and what about Nike?
 
tbaldwin said:
In Bloom is that Bullshit i smell?
So you boycott Coke at least thats something..
What about Nestle or do dying African babies not matter and what about Nike?
What about those starving kiddies who made the clothes you're wearing in some sweatshop? Do they not count? Unless you're solely buying gear that is specifically marketted as "ethical" then guaranteed, you are giving your money to the owners of sweatshops and businesses who use sweatshops.

Don't come this "you're so hypocritical" line with me, unless you're willing to examine your own hypocrisy.
 
Just making the point that some of you self rigteous liberal lefties who scapegoat politicians etc talk about solidarity etc but don't really give much of a shit when it comes right down to it.
 
tbaldwin said:
Just making the point that some of you self rigteous liberal lefties who scapegoat politicians etc talk about solidarity etc but don't really give much of a shit when it comes right down to it.
*cough*
In Bloom said:
What about those starving kiddies who made the clothes you're wearing in some sweatshop? Do they not count? Unless you're solely buying gear that is specifically marketted as "ethical" then guaranteed, you are giving your money to the owners of sweatshops and businesses who use sweatshops.

Don't come this "you're so hypocritical" line with me, unless you're willing to examine your own hypocrisy.
I'm not wasting any more of my time on your shite, baldwin, I have better things to do with it.
 
I support workers' organisations' right to protest and improve their working conditions, but let's not kid ourselves that not having a job is better in any way than not having one. Many people in Africa would love to work in the kind of factories that many in China, for example, work in. Capitalism provides an opportunity as well as a compulsion.
 
slaar said:
I support workers' organisations' right to protest and improve their working conditions, but let's not kid ourselves that not having a job is better in any way than not having one. Many people in Africa would love to work in the kind of factories that many in China, for example, work in. Capitalism provides an opportunity as well as a compulsion.


Consumer power can influence companies who are prepared to spend billions of pounds on their image. If Nike and Nestle etc are just free to go wherever they can get the cheapest Labour,it's bad news for the people who produce their goods as well.
 
all ethical consumerism is to some extent hypocritical but thenyou can eitheir act no matter how small the act or sit on the sidelines carping.
don't always buy fairtrade and am broke but do try sometimes its not always that more expensive and is usally better quality.
 
likesfish said:
all ethical consumerism is to some extent hypocritical but thenyou can eitheir act no matter how small the act or sit on the sidelines carping.
This is another thing that pisses me off.

As if because I don't buy fairtrade (which makes next to no impact) I'm "sit[ting] on the sidelines carping." Bollocks :rolleyes:
 
In Bloom said:
This is another thing that pisses me off.

As if because I don't buy fairtrade (which makes next to no impact) I'm "sit[ting] on the sidelines carping." Bollocks :rolleyes:

What's wrong with sitting off carping and thinking? :)
 
I was thinking about this today.

The term "Fairtrade" implies to me that the trade which has been used to purchase / sell the goods is equal.

I think OXFAM when i think Fair Trade. Assumingly because OXFAM was the charity who brought Fair Trade to my area in the early 1990's.

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/press/releases/ft_fortnight010305.htm

Do OXFAM work fairly? I will leave that thought up to you... But advise you not to ask any of the major dealers in second hand goods. Or to visit any areas of national crisis... when they are often more concerend with getting the PR aspect of what they are doing in place before actually helping.

when an organisation has an administration costs of 6.0 Million, I do wonder what exactly they are doing. Because they are not providing much help to the individual trader in the UK. They have nearly become as big as some of the main superstores... How many charity shops are there in your town???


http://www.oxfam.org.uk/about_us/downloads/report2004.pdf
 
you may only be paying 50p for your bag of tea bags but someone else in the developing world is paying the true cost. Our food is artificially cheap and we should n't expect to pay pennies for products.

Why not drink less tea but when you do buy fairtrade,

thats how I get around not being able to afford it :)
 
We dont buy nestle products on the whole due to the cruelty and negligence afforded by them to third world countires.

We dont buy any nike goods, for the same reason, and only wear donations of clothes which have labels... I am the re-cycle clothes queen ;)


most of our village donate to us! :d
 
tbaldwin said:
My arguement is not that i'm perfect but i do want to contribute to making things a bit better when and where i can. Thats why i like fair trade.
Would you support any company no matter how they treated the workers eg Nestle,Nike etc I don't because i believe that those companies should be boycotted due to the way they treat their workers.
nike and so on mistreat their workers because they need to in order to keep their share price up - the larger a company, the more liberties they have to take, the more surplus value they must try to extract...taking your money elsewhere will simply be egging on another company into a situation where it must do the same as the company you're boycotting. it's entirely false. the problem isn't nike, the problem is capitalism.

many of these complaints don't apply to fairtrade, as fairtrade setups are generally charitable and so not quite as concerned with profit, and certainly not concerned with shareholders. however, this is a double edged sword - there is therefore not the same drive to lower prices as with a standard corporation, and so not the same accessibility to lower-income markets. fair-trade tea will in all probability never be that cheap, and the movement will always be a bit of a middle-class concern.

REMIND ME AGAIN,DO YO BELIEVE IN WORKERS RIGHTS?

Yes, which is why i'd rather concentrate my efforts on actually achieving workers rights than pursuing entirely peripheral concerns like nike boycotts.
 
cmdrdeathguts said:
nike and so on mistreat their workers because they need to in order to keep their share price up - the larger a company, the more liberties they have to take, the more surplus value they must try to extract...taking your money elsewhere will simply be egging on another company into a situation where it must do the same as the company you're boycotting. it's entirely false. the problem isn't nike, the problem is capitalism.

many of these complaints don't apply to fairtrade, as fairtrade setups are generally charitable and so not quite as concerned with profit, and certainly not concerned with shareholders. however, this is a double edged sword - there is therefore not the same drive to lower prices as with a standard corporation, and so not the same accessibility to lower-income markets. fair-trade tea will in all probability never be that cheap, and the movement will always be a bit of a middle-class concern.



Yes, which is why i'd rather concentrate my efforts on actually achieving workers rights than pursuing entirely peripheral concerns like nike boycotts.

What frustrates me about the whole sweatshop/fair trade argument is misinformation. You see studies and rpeorts quoted that are over four years out of date. Four years is a very long time in S.E. Asia. Also campaigners do not have any access to the places they are protesting about.

Nike now pay their workers more than many other places do and the conditions in the factories that make their stuff are much better, they make high grade branded product and they need it to be like this or the stuff that gets churned out will be shit.

How do I know? I've been in a few factories that make their stuff. Things can change you know - a big worker shortage in the South of China is the thing that has made the most difference to conditions and salary, recently - salaries have gone up by a third to half. If they don't have good working, living conditions and a good canteen, they can't attract the workers they need.

Nike factories don't generally make only Nike anyway - I've worked at one - it also made Clarks and New Balance amongst other brands, so you can see the pointlessness of boycotting one or two brands then buying another.

Fairtrade clothing, hmm I'm not so sure about. I thought the Blackspot sneaker was a bit of a marketing thang, you could buy any shoe from any Portuguese factory and the worker conditions, unionisation and salaries would be the same, yet they were trumpeting their shoe like it was going to save the world or something. Personally, I think alot of fairtrade can be more about marketing to people who feel guilty than anything else.

I'd feel pretty daft wearing fair trade clothing, TBH, but I do buy fair trade coffee - does this make me a hypocrite? :p
 
cmdrdeathguts said:
nike and so on mistreat their workers because they need to in order to keep their share price up - the larger a company, the more liberties they have to take, the more surplus value they must try to extract...taking your money elsewhere will simply be egging on another company into a situation where it must do the same as the company you're boycotting. it's entirely false. the problem isn't nike, the problem is capitalism.

many of these complaints don't apply to fairtrade, as fairtrade setups are generally charitable and so not quite as concerned with profit, and certainly not concerned with shareholders. however, this is a double edged sword - there is therefore not the same drive to lower prices as with a standard corporation, and so not the same accessibility to lower-income markets. fair-trade tea will in all probability never be that cheap, and the movement will always be a bit of a middle-class concern.



Yes, which is why i'd rather concentrate my efforts on actually achieving workers rights than pursuing entirely peripheral concerns like nike boycotts.

Consumer boycotts are the best way of supporting workers rights in the developing world.US students campaigns against Reebok and Nike put direct pressure on both companies to improve pay and conditions.

Short of inbloom leading a worldwide revolution (read his leaflet to rate his chances) it seems to me a good thing to support workers rights in this way.
If we don't support shit companies there is a chance that at least some of them will change at least some of their practices.
Nike etc spend billions on their image and anything that damages that image they have to take seriously...
 
tbaldwin said:
Consumer boycotts are the best way of supporting workers rights in the developing world.US students campaigns against Reebok and Nike put direct pressure on both companies to improve pay and conditions.

Short of inbloom leading a worldwide revolution (read his leaflet to rate his chances) it seems to me a good thing to support workers rights in this way.
If we don't support shit companies there is a chance that at least some of them will change at least some of their practices.
Nike etc spend billions on their image and anything that damages that image they have to take seriously...

Consumer boycotts have made a difference to worker rights and market forces are making even more of a difference now. I know it's 'sexy' to target brands, but I think more attention should be paid to the value market, where margins are tight to say the least. It seems largely ignored by protestors. Prices are plummeting and this is due to consumer demand. I heard last week that Walmart are even opening their own container port in order to cut costs further - because they've taken all they can out at a factory level, it's impossible to go any lower there, (especially because of the price of oil /salary increases etc), so they have to look at the rest of the chain to see what savings can be made.

It is true to say that this is a capitalist problem - boycotting individual brands makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things. It's also true to say that most consumers don't give a flying fuck - they want the lowest price - this is borne out in the price deflation I've seen in my trade for the past 15 years. Charge what you used to charge and it sticks to the shelves. I've never known it like this. I really can't see much changing as long as people expect to buy a top for £2 or a pair of jeans for £4. I work in manufacturing a bit in the UK (as well as SE Asia), but the retail price is about £150 compared to about £30, even at that £150 level, it's a struggle for the maunfacturer to survive.

So, I find it hypocritical when people boycott Nike but shop in Primark - I mean c'mon!
 
pinkmonkey said:
So, I find it hypocritical when people boycott Nike but shop in Primark - I mean c'mon!

But it's not hypocritical. Its not great but people have to get their clothes from somewhere and if they avoid "brands" they know who have shit pay and conditions for their workers who then charge consumers well over the top that has to be a good thing.
It's not hypocritical to try and do something however small. You can point to anything short of worldwide revolution as meaningless or hypocritical and that way change never happens.
All or Nothing leads nowhere.
 
tbaldwin said:
But it's not hypocritical. Its not great but people have to get their clothes from somewhere and if they avoid "brands" they know who have shit pay and conditions for their workers who then charge consumers well over the top that has to be a good thing.
It's not hypocritical to try and do something however small. You can point to anything short of worldwide revolution as meaningless or hypocritical and that way change never happens.
All or Nothing leads nowhere.

But my point is that branded factories have usually far superior pay and conditions than own label manufacturers. They are not shitholes. Having spent a hell of a lot of time in both types of place, and in the past even been involved in auditing these places, I think I've a bit more of an idea about this than most. You can't get 'fair trade' for two quid - there is nothing left in the profit margin to pay for it.
 
I make personal choices which support fair trade and other forms of ethical consumerism, without illusion.

However, I have to stand up wholeheartedly for InBloom in the face of TBaldwins stupid attacks.

Fair trade is essentialy a contradiction in terms. I support it out of solidarity with workers in the south, because I would rather buy products that are made by less oppressed workers. However, all this does is make me feel a little better for myself and provide a few communities in the South with a few more crumbs than they would have otherwise. Not to be sniffed at maybe, but no real challenge to the problem... Capitalism.

One of the problems with fair trade is when people like Tbaldwin agressively attack others for not supporting it, as if it is impossible for someone to have a critical analysis of fair trade, or insufficient means to indulge in it consistently.

Some of my wealthier neighbours - and their are quite a few - can afford to buy everything ethically. I live close to a range of small independent shops selling ethical produce from food, to clothing and cosmetics. It really brings home the danger of fair trade being used as a way of appeasing the consiences of a priveleged minority while ignoring the real problems. The fair trade principles rarely seem to extend to the way in which staff are treated in the developed world.
 
Back
Top Bottom