This is not new. The British boast of banning slavery but they will never tell you about their invention of bonded labour. They imported bonded labour to South Africa, Guyana and other parts of their empire.
Now companies can use the Internet to keep the labour remote. Doesn't even require a degree.
yeah how else do you want to organise who gets paid what? its nice and virtuous to claim that poor women should get paid more.
but there's simply not that much money to redistribute, unless more companies provide employment and drive labour demand up - exactly what is happening in this article.
so you can gesture all you want about women being poor and deserving more money, but it doesn't mean anything. you can't pay them above market rate, where will the money come from? certainly not taxes - there's simply not enough to go by.
Honestly, I love this comment, and I’m going to save it.
You’re so convinced that money is more important than human dignity you use the word “generosity” as invective. It can be hard to remember that this point of view exists, so thank you for the reminder.
its easy to talk about "human dignity" but its hard to talk about practical concerns on how to get the money for the dignity. please tell me, how do you expect the poor women in villages to get above market rate? unions? then the companies wouldn't even step foot in India and would rather move to Cambodia or Bangladesh or Ghana.
This is not new. The British boast of banning slavery but they will never tell you about their invention of bonded labour. They imported bonded labour to South Africa, Guyana and other parts of their empire.
Now companies can use the Internet to keep the labour remote. Doesn't even require a degree.