Based on the analysis and arguments presented by the Adam Smith Institute, all of the following options are correct:
Working in sweatshops is often better than the alternatives available to people in poor countries.
Sweatshops can contribute to the economic development of poor countries.
Even though the wage rates paid by sweatshops may seem very low to us, by local standards they are generally above the local average.
All options are correct.
The Adam Smith Institute, a free-market think tank, presents several arguments in support of sweatshops, though it acknowledges the ethical concerns they raise. Here are the points you mentioned, along with my analysis of their presence in the institute's articles:
Working in sweatshops is often better than the alternatives: This is a key argument, suggesting that for many people in developing countries, sweatshops offer a better option than subsistence farming, unemployment, or even informal work with fewer protections. They highlight studies showing improved living standards and reduced poverty among communities with sweatshops compared to those without.
Sweatshops can contribute to the economic development of poor countries: The institute argues that sweatshops bring foreign investment, create jobs, and boost exports, leading to increased tax revenue and infrastructure development. This, they claim, can kickstart economic growth and poverty reduction in the long run.
Even though wages seem low, they're often above the local average: The institute acknowledges that wages in sweatshops might seem exploitative from a Western perspective, but they argue that they're often higher than what workers could earn in alternative sectors or locations within their own countries. This can lead to improved living standards and opportunities for families.
Automation is unlikely to make sweatshops irrelevant: The institute downplays the threat of automation replacing sweatshop jobs, arguing that it's more likely to affect higher-skilled jobs in developed countries. They believe that for many developing countries, sweatshops will remain a relevant source of employment for the foreseeable future.
It's important to note that these arguments are controversial and have been challenged by critics who emphasize the poor working conditions, safety hazards, and exploitation present in many sweatshops. The ethical implications of profiting from such practices remain a subject of ongoing debate.
Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to support sweatshops is a complex one with no easy answers. Weighing the potential benefits against the ethical concerns requires careful consideration of all sides of the issue.