The following started out as a letter that I just sent to a friend. I have added to it and deleted parts of it to protect their privacy. But the letter was a good basic outline for this essay that I had planned on writing anyway.
I'm not naming names on such a public place as Facebook or Bloogspot....but....I've had three requests for funds to help support young people in the last few days .....by an organization that is much better at fund raising activities than they are at feeding children. And where does the first 89% of the raised funds go to? Big fancy 4 WD SUVs with the name of their organization plastered on the side....one for each employee...they cost approx $100,000 each in Cambodia because they are shipped in from elsewhere...no dealer in Cambodia. Their employees live in fantastic accomodations...with all the 'western amenities" , not at all experiencing ANY of the local hardships.
They love to drive around and take pictures of kids in rags, living in dumps and with big swollen malnourished bellies. Great photo ops for fund raising brochures, TV ads, and glossy magazine spreads. As well as big fancy vehicles they also have big fancy cameras. We saw all of this first hand and we asked a lot of questions and did a lot of research while we were there.
And back home in the U S and Canada parents everywhere get to be proud of the efforts being put out by their own children to help starving children. And proud you should be! It IS wonderful that our kids are learning that others are not as well off as them and never have to go without a meal or a warm bed So, the NGOs are doing a great job of funding and at the same time making us and our children feel good. Yes, 11 % of the funds raised will go to their projects around the world....but only projects that make good photo ops for further fund raising.
I'm not saying don't participate, however , it does more to teach charity to your own child than anything else. Just be aware that 11 % of $5 milliion is only just $550,000. And only $55 of every $500 raised. Chances are that YOUR child already knows about good charities by participating in such things as charity walks for breast cancer research The organization I refer to above is not the only one driving nice fancy Lexus SUVs around S E Asia, so please do your research!
Do Tony and I give to charity? Of course we do. Each year we donate to the BC Cancer Foundation. In Cambodia we help support 45 orphans in an orphanage where no NGO is involved to skim off the top. And in December the two of us painted a school, donating our time and labour rather than money. We have also been involved in a few projects where we firmly keep in mind that to give a man a fish feeds him for a day, but to teach him to fish feeds him for his lifetime. If the charity NGOs in the third world believed in that, their projects would be very different than what they are at present...and hopefully, they would eventually put themselves out of business. Wouldn't that be a wonderful world?
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Friday, January 30, 2009
January 30, 2009.
I have spent a lot of time writing what I consider to be some thoughts worth pursueing. However, Thailand being Thailand and lese majestie being in full operation, my words will not be posted here until I am in either Mexico or the US.
In the meantime...here's some silly stuff...
WHY IS IT THAT.....?
· You have to go to Turkey for a great cup of tea, and to Vietnam for a great cup of coffee?
· Spanish wine is cheaper in Ireland than it is in Spain?
· Durian fruit tastes so good but smells so bad that it is forbidden in most elevators and on buses?
· The key you need is always the last one available on the keychain?
· When you put 8 socks into the laundry you only get back seven?
· That the only screaming baby on an airplane is always in the seat directly behind yours?
· If there is only one reading light in the hotel room, it is not on YOUR side of the bed?
· A Greek salad tastes so much better when it is eaten in the shadow of the Acropolis?
· A Guiness tastes so much better when drunk in an Irish pub?
· A McDonalds hamburger tastes the same all over the world, but a Pizza Hut pizza in Asia has no resemblance what-so-ever to a North American Pizza Hut pizza?
· In Cambodia it is against the law to have your vehicle lights on in the daytime and in Canada it is against the law NOT to have them on during the day?
· Brain cells come and brain cells go but fat cells live forever?
· The really good forwarded emails always go to someone else?
Feel free to answer any or all of these! Not exactly earth shattering questions but maybe there are some earth shattering answers!
.......
Monday, January 19, 2009
Jan 19, 2009 Follow-up to Cambodian Sweatshops
Follow-up to Cambodian Sweatshops
Little did I know when I read the column called “Cambodian Sweatshops” in the Bangkok Post last week that I was reading anything other than the commentary of a local writer. I was very impressed with the ideas that were presented and typed the column into this blog. A few hours after posting this, I had several friends reply to my blog announcement saying I should credit the writer.
I had a problem with that as I did not know his name. After getting the information I sought, from the Post, in regards to the writer’s name, I added it to the blog and then googled the name Nicholas Kristof. Wow, what a shock. He’s a famous commentary writer for the New York Times, which had just published the same column. So I apologize and have duly noted on that blog that this was written by him and that my blog will contain, from time to time, the writings of other authors.
I have now visited the website of the New York Times, seen the online version of the column and the pages of comments that have been made in response.
If anyone cares to pursue the subject further and to see those responses, here is the link:
Please keep in mind if you read the comments, that several people refer to the sweatshops of China or India. This column was written specifically about Cambodia, where factory situations may be different. That I don’t know. What I do know is that when we at home hear of someone making $2 a day we are quick to think that “fair wage for fair work” does not exist. My own comment on the above site reads :
“Having spent three months in Cambodia recently I can say that your word “sweatshop” is a misnomer. We saw hundreds of workers {outside the factories} each day at noon eating their lunches out in the fresh air. They were all well dressed and anyone we talked to said that yes, there were better toilets provided than in their homes, if their homes had one at all. The most common wage we heard mentioned was about $60 a month or $2 a day.
We also talked to many waitresses in the restaurants where we ate. They all worked 7 days a week, sometimes 10 or 12 hours. Most of them were fed several meals a day from the kitchens of these establishments. They had regular breaks and toilet facilities. And they were paid $60 a month. The same as the workers in the “sweatshops”.Out of that $60 it is possible to rent a room for about $25 a month, pay $10 a month for English lessons and still have money left over for meals that are not provided and for basic personal items that they could never have afforded before…like toothpaste and feminine hygene products.So keep writing Mr Kristof…some of us in Asia agree with you.”
There are several pages of comments, some agreeing with Kristof’s ideas, some disagreeing and some totalling missing the point altogether. But it’s interesting reading, and worth the time to explore the subject further.
I personally am also not in favour of “sweatshops” that hire children, or poison the surrounding countryside, or treat the employees as slaves with no dignity. But to pay a few dollars a day in wages when that is the local rate for unskilled labour is no sin. And the factories in Cambodia, at least the ones that I saw, and there were many, were playing a huge role in lifting their employees out of the abject poverty so common in this very poor country.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
January 16, 2009 Cambodian Sweatshops
By Nicholas Kristof
In Cambodia, sweatshops are a dream.
Before Barack Obama and his team act on their talk about “labour standards” I’d like to offer them a tour of the vast garbage dump in Phnom Penh. This is a Dante-like vision of hell. It’s a mountain of festering refuse that takes a half hour to hike across while it emits clouds of smoke from subterranean fires.
The miasma of toxic stink leaves you gasping, breezes batter you with filth, and even the rats look forlorn. Then the smoke parts and you come across a child ambling barefoot, searching for old plastic cups that recyclers will buy for five cents a pound. Many families actually live in shacks on this smoking garbage.
Obama and the Democrats who favour labour standards in trade agreements mean well, for they intend to fight back at oppressive sweatshops abroad. But while it shocks Americans to hear it, the central challenge in the poorest countries is not that sweatshops exploit too many people, but that they don’t exploit enough. Talk to these families in the dump, and a job in a sweatshop is a cherished dream, an escalator out of poverty. “I’d love to get a job in a factory.” said Pim Srey Rath, a 19 year old woman scavenging for plastic. “At least that work is in the shade. Here is where it’s too hot.”
Another woman, Vath Sam Oeun, hopes her 10 year old boy, scavenging beside her, grows up to get a factory job, partly because she has seen other children run over by garbage trucks. Her boy has never been to a doctor or a dentist, and last bathed when he was two, so a sweatshop job by comparison would be far more pleasant and less dangerous.
I’m glad that many Americans are repulsed by the idea of importing products made by barely paid, barely legal workers in dangerous factories. Yet sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause, and banning them closes off one route out of poverty. At a time of tremendous economic distress and protectionist pressures, there’s a danger that tighter labour standards will be used as an excuse to curb trade.
When I defend sweatshops, people always ask me: But would you want to work in a sweatshop? No, of course not. But I would want even less to pull a rickshaw. In the hierarchy of jobs in poor countries, sweltering at a sewing machine is not the bottom.
My views on sweatshops are shaped by years of travelling in South East Asia, watching as living standards soared because of sweatshop jobs.
Manufacturing is one sector that can provide millions of jobs. Yet sweatshops usually go not to the poorest nations but to better–off countries with more reliable electricity and ports.
I often hear the argument: Labour standards can improve wages and working conditions, without greatly affecting the eventual retail costs of goods. That’s true. But labour standards and ”living wages” have a larger impact on production costs that companies are always trying to pare. The result is to push companies to operate more capital-intensive factories in better-off nations like Malaysia, rather than labour-intensive factories in poorer countries like Ghana or Cambodia.
Cambodia has, in fact, pursued an interesting experiment by working with factories to establish decent labour standards and wages. It is a worthwhile idea, but one result of paying above-market wages is that those in charge of hiring often demand bribes – sometimes a month’s salary - in exchange for a job.
In addition, these standards add to production costs, so some factories have closed because of the global economic crisis and the difficulty of competing internationally. The best way to help people in the poorest countries isn’t to campaign against sweatshops but to promote manufacturing there. One of the best things America could do for Cambodia would be to strengthen programs to encourage imports, and nudge Europe to match it.
Among people who work in development, many strongly believe (but few dare say very loudly) that one of the best hopes for the poorest countries would be to build their manufacturing industries. But global campaigns against sweatshops make that less likely.
I know that Americans have a hard time accepting that sweatshops can help people. But take it from 13 year old Neuo Chanthou, who earns a bit less than $1 a day scavenging in the dump. She’s wearing a “Playboy” shirt and hat that she found amid the filth, and she worries about her sister, who lost part of her hand when a garbage truck ran over her. “Ít’s dirty, hot and smelly here,” she said wistfully, “A factory is better.”
This inspirational essay was in Bangkok Post today, written by Nicholas Kristof
...
In Cambodia, sweatshops are a dream.
Before Barack Obama and his team act on their talk about “labour standards” I’d like to offer them a tour of the vast garbage dump in Phnom Penh. This is a Dante-like vision of hell. It’s a mountain of festering refuse that takes a half hour to hike across while it emits clouds of smoke from subterranean fires.
The miasma of toxic stink leaves you gasping, breezes batter you with filth, and even the rats look forlorn. Then the smoke parts and you come across a child ambling barefoot, searching for old plastic cups that recyclers will buy for five cents a pound. Many families actually live in shacks on this smoking garbage.
Obama and the Democrats who favour labour standards in trade agreements mean well, for they intend to fight back at oppressive sweatshops abroad. But while it shocks Americans to hear it, the central challenge in the poorest countries is not that sweatshops exploit too many people, but that they don’t exploit enough. Talk to these families in the dump, and a job in a sweatshop is a cherished dream, an escalator out of poverty. “I’d love to get a job in a factory.” said Pim Srey Rath, a 19 year old woman scavenging for plastic. “At least that work is in the shade. Here is where it’s too hot.”
Another woman, Vath Sam Oeun, hopes her 10 year old boy, scavenging beside her, grows up to get a factory job, partly because she has seen other children run over by garbage trucks. Her boy has never been to a doctor or a dentist, and last bathed when he was two, so a sweatshop job by comparison would be far more pleasant and less dangerous.
I’m glad that many Americans are repulsed by the idea of importing products made by barely paid, barely legal workers in dangerous factories. Yet sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause, and banning them closes off one route out of poverty. At a time of tremendous economic distress and protectionist pressures, there’s a danger that tighter labour standards will be used as an excuse to curb trade.
When I defend sweatshops, people always ask me: But would you want to work in a sweatshop? No, of course not. But I would want even less to pull a rickshaw. In the hierarchy of jobs in poor countries, sweltering at a sewing machine is not the bottom.
My views on sweatshops are shaped by years of travelling in South East Asia, watching as living standards soared because of sweatshop jobs.
Manufacturing is one sector that can provide millions of jobs. Yet sweatshops usually go not to the poorest nations but to better–off countries with more reliable electricity and ports.
I often hear the argument: Labour standards can improve wages and working conditions, without greatly affecting the eventual retail costs of goods. That’s true. But labour standards and ”living wages” have a larger impact on production costs that companies are always trying to pare. The result is to push companies to operate more capital-intensive factories in better-off nations like Malaysia, rather than labour-intensive factories in poorer countries like Ghana or Cambodia.
Cambodia has, in fact, pursued an interesting experiment by working with factories to establish decent labour standards and wages. It is a worthwhile idea, but one result of paying above-market wages is that those in charge of hiring often demand bribes – sometimes a month’s salary - in exchange for a job.
In addition, these standards add to production costs, so some factories have closed because of the global economic crisis and the difficulty of competing internationally. The best way to help people in the poorest countries isn’t to campaign against sweatshops but to promote manufacturing there. One of the best things America could do for Cambodia would be to strengthen programs to encourage imports, and nudge Europe to match it.
Among people who work in development, many strongly believe (but few dare say very loudly) that one of the best hopes for the poorest countries would be to build their manufacturing industries. But global campaigns against sweatshops make that less likely.
I know that Americans have a hard time accepting that sweatshops can help people. But take it from 13 year old Neuo Chanthou, who earns a bit less than $1 a day scavenging in the dump. She’s wearing a “Playboy” shirt and hat that she found amid the filth, and she worries about her sister, who lost part of her hand when a garbage truck ran over her. “Ít’s dirty, hot and smelly here,” she said wistfully, “A factory is better.”
This inspirational essay was in Bangkok Post today, written by Nicholas Kristof
...
Friday January 16, 2009 Welcome
I have written several essays, I have also come across the written thoughts of others, be they newspaper columns or formal essays, that I have thought worth keeping. My "Round the World with Helen and Tony" blog was not the place for these, although I will admit without extensive travel most of these thoughts would not exist in my mind. Having watched a very painful death of what had been a trustworthy laptop, I will save this mind fodder online.
I have experienced many cultures in the last couple of years and have a new awareness of what the world is, and can be. So I'll share some of these insights with anyone who cares to join me in the wanderings of my mind. Pull up a chair, grab a cuppa....and we're off
I wrote this Welcome, way back in January 2009. It is now 2016 and my life has changed dramatically! But I like my thought from almost 8 years ago...so will leave it here! I have gone through several more laptops since then, now mostly use an iPad or my iPhone! Tony is no longer my beloved husband that explored the world with me. He died in 2010. In 2011 I met Barrie and have been with him ever since. In 2011 I moved back to Canada but can still say that I have not spent a winter in Canada since 1990. 2011 was also the year I took up golf and love it.
Brand new life, new spouse, new adventures, and new places and thoughts to explore.
Grab a fresh cup of java, we're off once again!
I have experienced many cultures in the last couple of years and have a new awareness of what the world is, and can be. So I'll share some of these insights with anyone who cares to join me in the wanderings of my mind. Pull up a chair, grab a cuppa....and we're off
I wrote this Welcome, way back in January 2009. It is now 2016 and my life has changed dramatically! But I like my thought from almost 8 years ago...so will leave it here! I have gone through several more laptops since then, now mostly use an iPad or my iPhone! Tony is no longer my beloved husband that explored the world with me. He died in 2010. In 2011 I met Barrie and have been with him ever since. In 2011 I moved back to Canada but can still say that I have not spent a winter in Canada since 1990. 2011 was also the year I took up golf and love it.
Brand new life, new spouse, new adventures, and new places and thoughts to explore.
Grab a fresh cup of java, we're off once again!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
