Why Should The United States Enforce Regulations That Encourage A Fair Business

There are two stakeholders in this situation and they are: the companies Apple and Foxconn as well as the Chinese government. Apple has obligations to their employees both domestic and global. They need to be mindful that a corporation is only as good as its products as well as, its image. They need to be mindful that since its headquarters are in the United States, it should do all that it can to maintain a positive image. It is also important to make sure that the products they sell are quality products while keeping the price as low as possible. Foxconn has a stake in its people and the products they export. The unfair and inhumane working conditions forced the government to step in. Foxconn also needs to be mindful of the issues presented previously for Apple (the difference they are headquartered in China). The fact that labor violations were taking place, China’s government had an obligations to its people. They need to protect their citizens from hazardous work conditions and hold Foxconn accountable for their actions.

Large corporations such as Nike, Gap, and Reebok and many others from the United States have moved their factories to undeveloped nations; barely pay their employees enough to live on. Countries such as China, Indonesia, and Haiti have readily abundant cheap labor. There should be labor laws or an obligation of respecting workers to provide decent working conditions, fair wages, and safety standards.

companies to sell their products in other countries? Explain how this helps the U.S. (2-4 sentences. 2.0 points)

However, this could not be more wrong. First off, all of the employees in other nations who flock to Wal-Mart’s factories have the choice to do so. Even though the wages paid in third world nations is inconceivable in United States, those wages will still increase the employee’s income, which in turn increases the employee’s standard of living. The increases in standards of living will lead to economic innovations and increased productivity/efficiency. This process of evolving mirrors that same steps that the United States went through in its early beginnings as well. Secondly, critics want Wal-Mart to enforce labor laws in its overseas factories that are consistent with United States. However, Vedder refutes this demand stating, “We have no more right to expect Wal-Mart to enforce Chinese labor laws than the Chinese have the right to enforce ours” (Vedder). Clearly, this criticism is without reason and impossible. In addition, the regulations and laws in third world countries are not kept up to date as well as in America, not everyone has a birth certificate or passport proving their age. It is unreasonable to assume that Wal-Mart would be able to verify the ages of every single employee in Indonesia or China. (Vedder)

“A soul-searching debate is now coursing through the country: Child labor is universally condemned, but is it fair to multinationals to cut and run when incidents arise of children working?” writes David Montero in his article titled “Is Doing the Right Thing Wrong?” While child labor in the United States (U.S.) is not accepted, it still runs rampant in second and third world countries, which is why children often find their way into factories. When this happens people often boycott the companies where this is found, but boycotting is not the way to go. Just boycotting companies doesn’t do anything, and can often hurt the very children people are trying to help. Then there’s the actual legal workers, boycotting a company for having child labor has negative effects on the legal workers and can often derail needed progress that these second and third world countries desperately need. People often jump to boycott

* So companies can increase company revenue and be able to dominate international markets in order to establish more stores and spread product around. A good example is McDonalds, they are everywhere. This helps the US because in revenue allows a company to keep its base in the US, increase the national gross product, drive consumer activity, keep jobs, and increase the export business, which goes along with jobs.

According to the author “the harsher the working conditions and the more companies can avoid responsibility for catastrophes they cause, the more money can go into the pockets of the rich” (Loomis 53). So, companies contract their work out and they make their profit from these reduced labor costs all while not having to claim responsibility for anything. The saddest part of all of this is that the countries these factories are built in do really need the jobs they create but these jobs are killing their

In the third world countries such as Vietnam, China, South Korea and Taiwan, we are provided with an example of cheap labour. These corporations could now achieve the benefit of the United States consumer market8, while keeping their costs extremely low in offshore production. The working conditions in the United States were poor for centuries, often little to nothing was done unless a tragedy occurred to influence worker rights by the public. This was the issue during the Industrial Revolution and in the late 20th century. In the United states, improvements have been made and these conditions have disappeared, with the privilege in some agricultural areas. Companies from the United States have moved a considerable amount of their factories

The United States became one of the most influential world powers virtually overnight. The system of functionality which maintains this growth and power is the refined codes of business practices which are the cornerstone for domestic and international business relations the world over.

There are too many cases in which workers across the globe are subjected to horrific working conditions. Because of the laws in place in the United States, manufacturing jobs are not

corporations to use cheap overseas labor” my first thoughts were yes because of my personal beliefs. But upon further thought and through discovery, I realized that from a business point of view we as a nation should still help promote economic globalization. In order to do so we need to outsource production and encourage trade. However, because we are fiscally involved in another country’s economy that doesn’t give American corporations the right to implement our laws and standards into other countries’ business practices and laws. Just because we see child labor, unfair wages, and violating overtime as immoral, doesn’t mean that the host county does. However global labor standards need to be unified.

The United States ranks as the highest gross domestic product nation in the world (Wickipedia, Retrieved March 22, 2014). This ranking indicates that millions of people buy, sell, trade and perform business transactions daily within a multitude of industries and professions. In order to preserve the trust and integrity of our financial systems, it is imperative that the United States implement, regulate, and enforce business practices to remain relevant and effective within the constantly changing global economic marketplace.

Globalization is an amazing tool for the world and it helps the economy growth. Sometimes, these big companies like Maquiladora, established their companies in poor countries or places where they can commit some acts without being put under the law. They use the citizens of those countries as workers, often paying them little amount of money or discriminating against who they hired. This often leads to many problems like death or misplacement, like the man I encountered while in Mexico. Giving up my vacation in mexico to give my time to help this man would be a good decision because this man and his deceased wife suffered a violation of human rights and he needs to get compensation from the company and acknowledgement of his human rights being violated.

One of the greatest international economic debates of all time has been the issue of free trade versus protectionism. Proponents of free trade believe in opening the global market, with as few restrictions on trade as possible. Proponents of protectionism believe in concentrating on the welfare of the domestic economy by limiting the open-market policy of the United States. However, what effects does this policy have for the international market and the other respective countries in this market? The question is not as complex as it may seem. Both sides have strong opinions representing their respective viewpoints, and even the population of the United States is divided when it comes to taking a stand in

Regulation in many cases is a good thing to implement. Many times it is used to sort of even the odds between the countries that have a lot and those that have a little. But so frequently can a little regulation turn into too much regulation. When this happen it through off the natural flow of trade. Although trade regulation can unfortunately limit trade with some countries, which could result in less diversified and productive countries, trade protection is still safer for developing countries because small developing countries cannot compete as effectively as the more developed industrialized countries. These two types of countries have two completely different levels of ability and capacity to trade. If a developing country has one main industry, it cannot risk trading with large developed countries that have many huge similar industries. It is not fair to force these developing countries to compete globally if they are inexperience and are not yet prepared to trade in this manner because of lack of resources, wealth, and labor that these experienced developed countries have.