cost of producing cotton in the United States forces

thAvo, ‘thus Pveen tion, It ton. “weat.. hrst, e thet kve.izst.10., art tht, I co!Ilpa…. by neg_ 6r Place at adver-a public luct (5). ot guar-ses and level of le corn-
er than lems in nsumer impos-ational ey con-reloca-[ called ope or uction ‘le fin-manu-nbled, )untlY t cost. riental itions
np0S-, for tirersi sold s3’Y were rly,a NEI
11,4Ifi41!:k • 11H t1t4LI 4 ‘111 41fl S10)/11 i) Lo, re art. no y: r, thF:Is. It 1r11,111.,11,hy StAndfirdN.N.A.yik’

1111.1 oihaw et di 4) (A,n,c,itt’Ini,, ,,,i,,,,, r, ,,,n, t'() try 01- origin i411efl on thc I.tht-1 .Ifid 1,-, „, ,Th,,. ::irlitries notorinti,. Ii cxpictItAtifili,i::::::;'” ,10 ” i’:I t, could p(iteritl.14 harm rilm al comparnek, fr., 11,4., iontnes ts untalf 1″”ver’ l””””””’ it ‘L.’ 1134′”i ii•-l’, : : ::: 1111d1( ”41 to attract busint.,,s in order t stirvm., boycotting lias both pros and cons, “targeted”h(),,t osstbk, and product information is unreliably, how a’rritgri:’rttlailY to shop ethically? On( alternative is to shop from th lim’ 71:iteer; to arments produced by two firms: Ameri –1 ik market tor ethical ( iothing, The options in (t:.cartilaidpapaarrt.e’ 11)–ias-nicdallt:Iswnlecallte American Apparel designs, knits, dyes, sews, markets, and distribute-products in Los Angeles ( “American Apparel Investor Relations)fhttt it does not claim that the raw material it uses was grown in the United States. The cost of producing cotton in the United States forces this fair trade-conscious company to buy it from Overseas (Belli 2). No Sweat is an online store that sells clothing and footwear produced by independent trade union members in Canada, the United States, and the developing Avorld. Established in 2000, this company guarantees that its products re fairly traded and that all workers receive a living wage ( No Sweat’) tile these two outlets sound good, they offer a limited selection a atively high prices. As a student, 1 am tempted to resist the increased rice level, but then I am reminded that as Meyers points out, ‘whatever ra we have to pay for a new pair of sneakers is not comparable to tht: ering that could be prevented by giving sweatshop workers a living Wage” ( 2). The and lack of ethical alternatives and the confusion about ma product int-or- _ . _ the garment industry make supporting sweatshops almost unavoidab le for consumers. It would be easy to become discouraged conclude that there is nothing we can do about sweatshop injustices. ir t., a conclusion would. be a mistake, however, because each opti-m . , panicles matter. Buying from alternative stores shows supptprttflOrerscrov awareness 4 Sii ch. potential, they to make a partial positive change. Bo:coht.ts htes.t,ptis also send the message to large companies thatt(l’at!roaorniuser, t rill u trfid., ,s who do uphold fair trade practices. Shopping F I decrease the enormous demand for new clothing. that ection of complacency, sending the message that o 4: manufacturing (Hale 2). Above ail each of these actioi:alsrrtte:ep_xrensse_nintsea: re is substantially flawed. resuent lar o ve , ur c rren ° u ., however action for the ethical echa(c:ict-es %V -tremelv Y n1g f‘eivte. r, to try our best to make moral loll 41 consumer in: iss rePind there is no clear *tio e X I I, and the solution to the problem they tik atshops (Lions w* Llye.10. ped world. a h our — ‘;,,ere is no clear moral answer to Y u – Ill help the clianp,e to begin from the p a , . t .i., change must ultimately come irow k the top, bottom and to wor hen we shop i:,. our consc:

part 8: Readings