Fox Host: People Who Died In Walmart Factory Fire Were Thankful For Their Jobs

[thoughtone]

source: Think Progress



The 129 Bangladeshis who died in a fire caused by poor fire safety conditions in their garment factory should be thankful for their jobs, according to Fox Business host Charles Payne. Speaking with Neil Cavuto on Fox News this Monday, Payne excused this Sunday’s fire as a rare event and labelled all critics of the unsafe conditions that contributed to the tragedy as anti-Capitalist:

PAYNE: It is tragic. I don’t think something like this will happen again. Don’t think that the people in Bangladesh who perished didn’t want or need those jobs, as well. I know we like to victimize everyone in this country, particularly when it comes to for-profit motivation, which is being assaulted. But, you know, it is a tragedy but I think it is a stretch, an amazing stretch, to sort of try to pin this on Walmart but, of course, the unions in this country are desperate.
​

Watch it:


<CENTER><IFRAME height=260 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7R0Ba3NN7uM" frameBorder=0 width=400 allowfullscreen></IFRAME></CENTER><CENTER> </CENTER>
The Bangladeshi factory in question, Tazreen Factories, had no functioning extinguishers, locked the exits, and employed managers who told factory workers to go back to their stations when the fire alarm went off. Since 2006, over 200 people have died in Bangladeshi garment factories as a consequence of the substandard safety precautions prevalent in their factory. Some believe companies like Walmart — whose brands were found in the burnt factory — would move if production at the faculty were more expensive; that is, if things like basic safety precautions were implemented.

During his defense of the factory, Payne referred to himself as “a spokesman for capitalism and the American Dream” and said “for a lot of people, this [Walmart business practice] is a step in the right direction.”

 

[Upgrade Dave]

I know a lot of people, myself included, like to shorthand Fox News as a wing of the Republican Party but that's not entirely true. They're the propaganda wing of those that see money and the pursuit of it as the most important of all values, even over human decency.
That isn't the "American Dream", Charles.

 

[Greed]

One of the more interesting aspects of human behavior is the constant shitting on the past as if it doesn't apply to them.

Basically every "rich" country has gone through this phase of having these low-wage and minimal-rights enforcements kind of jobs, but the "rich" countries talk about these jobs as if they shouldn't exist.

History has shown that these jobs are beneficial because people with a little something will demand more. Compared to people who have absolutely nothing and will desperately take anything.

In the long run, this will likely spur the same kind of labor rights movement in Bangladesh that it spurred in the United States when this kind of thing happened here.

 

[QueEx]

One of the more interesting aspects of human behavior is the constant shitting on the past as if it doesn't apply to them.

Basically every "rich" country has gone through this phase of having these low-wage and minimal-rights enforcements kind of jobs, but the "rich" countries talk about these jobs as if they shouldn't exist.

History has shown that these jobs are beneficial because people with a little something will demand more. Compared to people who have absolutely nothing and will desperately take anything.

In the long run, this will likely spur the same kind of labor rights movement in Bangladesh that it spurred in the United States when this kind of thing happened here.

Damn Greed. I thought it was this kind of tragedy in Bangladesh, generally, that help spur reform that arose out of the industrial revolution. Low-wage jobs are one issue -- but knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately exposing people to "minimal-rights enforcement kind of jobs", as you labeled it is quite another. It should be criminal, in any society, and wrong in every society to purposely expose people to life-threatening conditions, merely so that some som-bitch(s) might reap higher economic profits.

This isn't nation building, its profitting without any regard to the safety of others.

 

[Greed]

Damn Greed. I thought it was this kind of tragedy in Bangladesh, generally, that help spur reform that arose out of the industrial revolution. Low-wage jobs are one issue -- but knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately exposing people to "minimal-rights enforcement kind of jobs", as you labeled it is quite another. It should be criminal, in any society, and wrong in every society to purposely expose people to life-threatening conditions, merely so that some som-bitch(s) might reap higher economic profits.

This isn't nation building, its profitting without any regard to the safety of others.

Are we really saying anything different?

Some countries are currently going through their "industrial revolution."

In "rich" countries it is illegal and we've rejected the wide-spread existence of these jobs in our countries, but to give blanket condemnation to developing countries taking those same risk is not our business and only makes us complete hypocrites.

And most importantly, developing nations have rejected this condemnation. China is the most prominent case of a country transitioning out of these types of jobs. Every country that is going to enter the rich nation category will go through this phase.

People with the economic freedom to take a shit job will often demand political freedom to protect their gains. Achievement of both freedoms will result in a rich country.

This is the same logic I use when I say get rid of the minimum wage in America. Let people exercise their economic freedom and it will lead to greater political freedom.

 

[QueEx]

Are we really saying anything different?

Some countries are currently going through their "industrial revolution."

In "rich" countries it is illegal and we've rejected the wide-spread existence of these jobs in our countries, but to give blanket condemnation to developing countries taking those same risk is not our business and only makes us complete hypocrites.

Its not our business so long as we're not complicit in it. If Walmart had no knowlege of working conditions that are more likely than not to result in death and disfigurement of innocent people merely trying to eke out a living, I probably wouldn't disagree with you. If, on the other hand, Walmart knew of and contributed to harm that would arise out of those conditions I strongly disagree, morally, if not legally, as well.

People with the economic freedom to take a shit job will often demand political freedom to protect their gains. Achievement of both freedoms will result in a rich country.

There are all kinds of shit jobs -- but a job where the employer is deliberately exposing the workers to conditions that will needlessly result in their deaths or disfigurement, is not a shit job. Thats a "Killer Job" -- and in most societies -- even in developing societies -- that kind of deliberate disregard for human life is just indefensible.

This is the same logic I use when I say get rid of the minimum wage in America. Let people exercise their economic freedom and it will lead to greater political freedom.

I've been pondering your "minimum wage argument" (MWA) -- and while I am at this point inclined to disagree with its rationale, its not relevant here for the simple reason that your MWA focuses on whether one should be entitled to work for whatever wage an employer is willing to pay. The argument that I am making here isn't a matter of employee-economics, its employee physical safety. I think thats different.

 

[Greed]

Its not our business so long as we're not complicit in it. If Walmart had no knowlege of working conditions that are more likely than not to result in death and disfigurement of innocent people merely trying to eke out a living, I probably wouldn't disagree with you. If, on the other hand, Walmart knew of and contributed to harm that would arise out of those conditions I strongly disagree, morally, if not legally, as well.





There are all kinds of shit jobs -- but a job where the employer is deliberately exposing the workers to conditions that will needlessly result in their deaths or disfigurement, is not a shit job. Thats a "Killer Job" -- and in most societies -- even in developing societies -- that kind of deliberate disregard for human life is just indefensible.




I've been pondering your "minimum wage argument" (MWA) -- and while I am at this point inclined to disagree with its rationale, its not relevant here for the simple reason that your MWA focuses on whether one should be entitled to work for whatever wage an employer is willing to pay. The argument that I am making here isn't a matter of employee-economics, its employee physical safety. I think thats different.

I wouldn't talk about a multi-national corporation and use the word "we" when describing the situation. I'm an individual, I don't attribute actions of one "American" to another. Let alone a corporation that's not a person.

I think what you're saying and the judgements you're forming are from the perspective of a citizen in a country past this phase.

People from different countries and within the same countries have different ideas of what it means to "eke out a living," "minimal-rights," "shit job," or a host of other terms that are subjective. The thing to remember is they are subjective.

One thing we've learned from these corporations like Ralph Lauren, Walmart, Apple, and Martha Stewart is they don't think being branded as killers is good marketing. Don't get me wrong, they still don't really care about human life, but they are not purposely working towards the death of people. They can still be held accountable.

Economic freedom overall is the issue whether it's in the context of the American minimum wage or employee physical safety in Bangladesh. It is no one's right to judge what is reasonable for someone else to do for a living. It is the worker's responsibility, and like I said, history says workers will demand those political rights on their own.

You can think you're protecting poor people in this country or in Bangladesh from irresponsible or malicious employers, but all you're doing is protecting poor people from their own judgment on where to work, which is not your place.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Are we really saying anything different?

Yes, you are.

Some countries are currently going through their "industrial revolution."

In "rich" countries it is illegal and we've rejected the wide-spread existence of these jobs in our countries, but to give blanket condemnation to developing countries taking those same risk is not our business and only makes us complete hypocrites.

And most importantly, developing nations have rejected this condemnation. China is the most prominent case of a country transitioning out of these types of jobs. Every country that is going to enter the rich nation category will go through this phase.

People with the economic freedom to take a shit job will often demand political freedom to protect their gains. Achievement of both freedoms will result in a rich country.

This is the same logic I use when I say get rid of the minimum wage in America. Let people exercise their economic freedom and it will lead to greater political freedom.

You have a point, most industrialized "first world" nations did go through their own pains of exploitation to get to where they are (even though the corporations are always looking for ways to circumvent those rules) but in 2012, there are no excuses. I don't expect everyone everywhere to have the same minimum wage laws but I do think workers are entitled to a decent living wage and the most basic of worker safety protections and it is incumbent on the nations, like ours, and corporations that do big business with these smaller companies to make sure that it's done.

Getting rid of minimum wage doesn't lead to greater political freedom for anyone but the wealthy, who would have even more money to spend on lobbyists.

 

[Greed]

You have a point, most industrialized "first world" nations did go through their own pains of exploitation to get to where they are (even though the corporations are always looking for ways to circumvent those rules) but in 2012, there are no excuses. I don't expect everyone everywhere to have the same minimum wage laws but I do think workers are entitled to a decent living wage and the most basic of worker safety protections and it is incumbent on the nations, like ours, and corporations that do big business with these smaller companies to make sure that it's done.

Getting rid of minimum wage doesn't lead to greater political freedom for anyone but the wealthy, who would have even more money to spend on lobbyists.

Who gets to decide what a "decent living wage" is? Anyone other than the worker or the worker?

Who gets to decide what the "most basic of worker safety protections" is? Anyone other than the worker or the worker?

The more freedom we have correlates with less influence a politician has on our daily lives which will reduce the return a lobbyist gets on his investments which will reduce the amount of money going into lobbying.

Dave if you think my statement regarding economic freedom leads to political freedom is inaccurate, then what do you think is the catalyst for the masses to demand more political rights? Do you think political freedom comes before economic freedom?

 

[QueEx]

I wouldn't talk about a multi-national corporation and use the word "we" when describing the situation. I'm an individual, I don't attribute actions of one "American" to another. Let alone a corporation that's not a person.

You know, I might agree with your "WE" objection -- except that we, Americans, are often the ultimate consumers of the Corporate Greed; and Corporate Greed's decision to move work to other places so that it can practice its Greed with near impunity, works to the detriment of willing American workers -- who Corporate Greed wouldn't be permitted, with impunity, to subject to the kind of horrendous working conditions that it does, a la Bangladesh. Individually or collectively, WE are affected.

I think what you're saying and the judgements you're forming are from the perspective of a citizen in a country past this phase.

I think not . . .

People from different countries and within the same countries have different ideas of what it means to "eke out a living," "minimal-rights," "shit job," or a host of other terms that are subjective. The thing to remember is they are subjective.

No matter their definition of a shit job -- and no matter how hard you struggle in this discourse to avoid it, deliberately subjecting people to conditions likely to cause severe harm or death -- is not a shit job. Its wrong. And, its indefensible.

One thing we've learned from these corporations like Ralph Lauren, Walmart, Apple, and Martha Stewart is they don't think being branded as killers is good marketing. Don't get me wrong, they still don't really care about human life, but they are not purposely working towards the death of people. They can still be held accountable.

They're not purposely working twoareds the death of people ??? Oh really ???

What do you call it when you permit conditions that will result in someone's severe injury or death to exist; you are aware that the conditions will result in severe injury or death; you subject people to such conditions; and you fail to take even minimal precautions against the known harm ???

Economic freedom overall is the issue whether it's in the context of the American minimum wage or employee physical safety in Bangladesh. It is no one's right to judge what is reasonable for someone else to do for a living. It is the worker's responsibility, and like I said, history says workers will demand those political rights on their own.

Is this Libertarianism ??? -- this economic freedom over the the rights of people rigidity. If so, no wonder I find it repulsive.

You can think you're protecting poor people in this country or in Bangladesh from irresponsible or malicious employers, but all you're doing is protecting poor people from their own judgment on where to work, which is not your place.

Damn. I must be my brother's keeper.

 

[Greed]

You know, I might agree with your "WE" objection -- except that we, Americans, are often the ultimate consumers of the Corporate Greed; and Corporate Greed's decision to move work to other places so that it can practice its Greed with near impunity, works to the detriment of willing American workers -- who Corporate Greed wouldn't be permitted, with impunity, to subject to the kind of horrendous working conditions that it does, a la Bangladesh. Individually or collectively, WE are affected.

We are affected, which I agree with, isn't the same as we share responsibility.

The people who took the action are responsible. I am not responsible because I didn't stop them. I reject good samaritan logic.

If the behavior disagrees with you, then you have an obligation to yourself not to economically support that business because their actions goes against your principles. There is no other responsibility on your part. Everything else is a choice you make.

I think not . . .

I think so. We could debate nature vs environment. Your sensibilities were formed in the context of a developed country. Do you think that's not true?

No matter their definition of a shit job -- and no matter how hard you struggle in this discourse to avoid it, deliberately subjecting people to conditions likely to cause severe harm or death -- is not a shit job. Its wrong. And, its indefensible.

Which is the heart of the matter. "No matter their definition of a shit job." People throughout history have made that determination for themselves, and amazingly, truly amazingly, we have come to the same conclusion. People want to make that determination for themselves and they choose to have the job exist.

Do you have an appreciation for the number of countries over hundreds of years that's had this nature of work conditions? History keeps repeating itself not because of ignorance but because they know exactly the results.

They're not purposely working twoareds the death of people ??? Oh really ???

What do you call it when you permit conditions that will result in someone's severe injury or death to exist; you are aware that the conditions will result in severe injury or death; you subject people to such conditions; and you fail to take even minimal precautions against the known harm ???

Que, you're automatically assigning a malicious intent to something you disagree with.

People don't think they are definitely causing someone's death, they are taking the risk that they can get away with dangerous conditions, the employer and the employee. Aren't there similar concepts of faults that are acknowledged in the law in America?

There are similar factories in Bangladesh right now where, over the life of the factory, nothing will happen. Countries and the workers in these countries have shown they will accept the risk.

Is this Libertarianism ??? -- this economic freedom over the the rights of people rigidity. If so, no wonder I find it repulsive.

Is this your thoughtone impression?

Damn. I must be my brother's keeper.

Only if your brother agrees, other than that it's just slavery and oppression.

Slavery and oppression applies even when people's intent are "good." It's something I wish black people will learn in regards to the current generation of white people.

 

[GhostofMarcus]

Why are they calling it the walmart factory fire, when walmart have stated that they did not have a contract with the factory. They showed that they dropped the factory for this very reason of unsafe fire hazards.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Who gets to decide what a "decent living wage" is? Anyone other than the worker or the worker?

Who gets to decide what the "most basic of worker safety protections" is? Anyone other than the worker or the worker?

The more freedom we have correlates with less influence a politician has on our daily lives which will reduce the return a lobbyist gets on his investments which will reduce the amount of money going into lobbying.

We have people now who decide both of those first two because when it was left to the worker and the employer, the employer abused it. We didn't get safety regulations, minimum wage laws, and child labor laws because the government felt like taking over. We got them because men, women, and children were being abused by their employers with little to show for it.

Dave if you think my statement regarding economic freedom leads to political freedom is inaccurate, then what do you think is the catalyst for the masses to demand more political rights? Do you think political freedom comes before economic freedom?

I do actually but then I take that philosophy, remember the lessons history has taught me, and apply it to the world we live in today, not some fanciful one I would like to live in.
We've seen over and over what that if companies aren't compelled to protect and pay their employees well, they won't. Go check out the mines in West Virginia for a modern day example. They get to do damn near whatever because of lax government oversight and nobody gives two shits until a mine explodes/collapses and then the hand wringing starts but nothing really changes.
It's great to talk about "freedom" but until human beings get a better grasp on responsibility, individual and shared, and pay that same lip service to justice, I will fully support and government strong enough to push back the constant effort by companies and corporations to exploit the masses.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Which is the heart of the matter. "No matter their definition of a shit job." People throughout history have made that determination for themselves, and amazingly, truly amazingly, we have come to the same conclusion. People want to make that determination for themselves and they choose to have the job exist.

Do you have an appreciation for the number of countries over hundreds of years that's had this nature of work conditions? History keeps repeating itself not because of ignorance but because they know exactly the results.

Excuse my language but this is horseshit.

The people in Bangladesh or West Virginia or anywhere else don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not the job exists. They don't have the options to say "Fuck that job. I'll go work for the other sweatshop or other dangerous mine." One, if pay and conditions are really better, they're fully staffed and two, the situation is work or starve in many of those areas and these are the only places hiring at all.
We don't have to wait for these other nations to "figure it out" while we keep buying cheap t-shirts and flip-flops.

 

[Greed]

We have people now who decide both of those first two because when it was left to the worker and the employer, the employer abused it. We didn't get safety regulations, minimum wage laws, and child labor laws because the government felt like taking over. We got them because men, women, and children were being abused by their employers with little to show for it.

Bangladesh has people to decide both too, and they disagree with you on whether Bangladesh should have the an American standard enforced in their country. You guys pretend you're with The People of the World, but only if their opinion is subordinate to your own.

I do actually but then I take that philosophy, remember the lessons history has taught me, and apply it to the world we live in today, not some fanciful one I would like to live in.

You use history lessons, but they don't contradict your judgement that political freedom comes first? I use the lesson of this country's founding, the civil rights movement, China, and the rest of the industrialized world to come to my conclusions. Being under kings, queens, and party dictatorship was the norm, but a modicum of economic freedom was established which proved to be the spark for greater political freedom because people wanted to keep what they earned. No taxation without representation.

What history lesson are you thinking of that supports your thinking?

We've seen over and over what that if companies aren't compelled to protect and pay their employees well, they won't. Go check out the mines in West Virginia for a modern day example. They get to do damn near whatever because of lax government oversight and nobody gives two shits until a mine explodes/collapses and then the hand wringing starts but nothing really changes.
It's great to talk about "freedom" but until human beings get a better grasp on responsibility, individual and shared, and pay that same lip service to justice, I will fully support and government strong enough to push back the constant effort by companies and corporations to exploit the masses.

If it helps, I don't give two shits even when a mine explodes. People with choice aren't victims unless there is fraud, where people are lied to regarding what they will be doing. Especially with your coal mine example. People are lined up for that dangerous job. Same thing is going on in the Dakotas with the current energy boom there. People are choosing their work and dismissing other people's belief that they shouldn't work there or are being exploited if they do. Good for them for making themselves better off as they see fit and defying you.

I have no idea how you can live through this last recession and think if you give government more authority, then it will be a check on corporations. Both Democrats and Republicans have created $23 trillion dollars worth of programs for corporations while no one has been made accountable for the multi-trillion dollar fraud conducted by the big housing banks, LIBOR-associated banks, or MF Global. The direct contradiction to your assertion is the 5 biggest banks before the recession are even bigger afterwards.

Weren't you disgusted when the head of JP Morgan Chase, when called to testify after a trader loss billions in taxpayer-insured money, was joking and laughing with both Democrats and Republicans shamelessly on national TV?

My point is corporations aren't compelled to protect and pay their employees well now and definitely aren't compelled to act responsibly. No one knows better than the people working in the energy sector how much they can ever rely on government to protect an individual's interest. The individual's best judgment is the only reliable regulation to protect oneself.

Excuse my language but this is horseshit.

The people in Bangladesh or West Virginia or anywhere else don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not the job exists. They don't have the options to say "Fuck that job. I'll go work for the other sweatshop or other dangerous mine." One, if pay and conditions are really better, they're fully staffed and two, the situation is work or starve in many of those areas and these are the only places hiring at all.
We don't have to wait for these other nations to "figure it out" while we keep buying cheap t-shirts and flip-flops.

I think you people really have an extreme lack of empathy. You make these assertions based on what you wouldn't do. Yes, the job is beneath the average American, but then you just declare that no one would ever WANT to do the job at all.

I said in the previous post that these countries aren't acting in ignorance. They know where these sweatshops lead too. They have history as a guide and see China currently getting richer after being in the same boat.

 

[thoughtone]

LOL at Greed's feign ignorance or defense of capitalism's parasitic ways. UD is debating him as if he is a reasonable person. Is there any question that mindsets like Greed's are the problem with this world?

 

[Greed]

LOL at Greed's feign ignorance or defense of capitalism's parasitic ways. UD is debating him as if he is a reasonable person. Is there any question that mindsets like Greed's are the problem with this world?

I would say there are more people in this world being told what's good for them than there are people free to live as they see fit.

Your values have a clear victory.

 

[thoughtone]

I would say there are more people in this world being told what's good for them than there are people free to live as they see fit.

Your values have a clear victory.

Yea, what's good for them is to not let the powerful have unchecked power over everthing.

 

[Greed]

Agreed, you should also mature and realize that governments are included in that list of the powerful.

And you should realized that an individual's rights is included in that list of everything.

 

[thoughtone]

Agreed, you should also mature and realize that governments are included in that list of the powerful.

And you should realized that an individual's rights is included in that list of everything.

You twit, in the USA, who laid out those individual's rights? Who is the only entity that can maintain those rights? And who is entrusted to enforce those rights?

In the USA, WE are the government. If you don't engage YOUR right to participate and petition YOUR government, then it's your fault.

 

[Greed]

People laid out those rights, people are the entity can maintain those rights, and government is entrusted to enforce those rights.

And I completely agree that government is you. Your values have been dominant for a long time. Thats why the results have been so fucked up.

 

[thoughtone]

People laid out those rights, people are the entity can maintain those rights, and government is entrusted to enforce those rights.

And I completely agree that government is you. Your values have been dominant for a long time. Thats why the results have been so fucked up.

And your values dominated for the first 110 years. Too bad you have issues with dealing with other people's rights.

 

[Greed]

And your values dominated for the first 110 years. To bad you have issues with dealing with other people's rights.

Your principle of some people being subordinate to others through government decree is more consistent with slavery than my principle that people should be left alone by government.

So you definitely own the first 110 years as well. Why deny it. This is the world you wanted and fought for. Enjoy your victory.

Of course, your idea of "other people's rights" is the right to negate individual rights by forcing people to follow your majority whim and substitute morality with legality.

Just get a law passed and that makes it right. Oh, I forgot, as long as it's your side that passed the law, anything goes.

 

[thoughtone]

Your principle of some people being subordinate to others through government decree is more consistent with slavery than my principle that people should be left alone by government.

So you definitely own the first 110 years as well. Why deny it. This is the world you wanted and fought for. Enjoy your victory.

Of course, your idea of "other people's rights" is the right to negate individual rights by forcing people to follow your majority whim and substitute morality with legality.

Just get a law passed and that makes it right. Oh, I forgot, as long as it's your side that passed the law, anything goes.

Absolute gibberish!

 

[thoughtone]

Why are they calling it the walmart factory fire, when walmart have stated that they did not have a contract with the factory. They showed that they dropped the factory for this very reason of unsafe fire hazards.

source: MSN news

Disney, Wal-Mart, Sears used Bangladesh factory; 3 arrested
</HEADER><SECTION sizcache07632807217747398="2" sizset="0">
A fire at a garment factory in Bangladesh killed 112 people Saturday.

<SECTION sizcache07632807217747398="1" sizset="0">

DHAKA, Bangladesh — Order books and clothing found at a Bangladeshi factory where a fire killed 112 people show that it was making clothing for Disney Pixar, Wal-Mart, Sears and other Western brands.

The Associated Press discovered clothing and records connected to the retailers Wednesday while police announced the arrests of three factory officials who are suspected of locking in workers who were killed in Saturday's fire.

Piles of children's shorts from Wal-Mart's Faded Glory brand were found among the charred equipment at the Tazreen Fashions Ltd. factory. Blue and off-white shorts from rap star Sean Combs ENYCE label were piled on the floor and stacked in cartons.

Entries in account books in the abandoned factory showed it took orders in recent months to produce clothes for Disney and Sears, despite the factory's spotty safety record.

Wal-Mart says the Tazreen Fashions Ltd. factory was making clothes for it without its knowledge. Wal-Mart had received an audit deeming the factory "high risk" last year.

Workers who survived the fire say exit doors were locked, fire extinguishers didn't work and managers had told them to go back to work after the fire alarm rang. A fire official has said that far fewer people would have died if there had been just one emergency exit.

Local police chief Habibur Rahman said three factory officials, but not the owner Tazreen Fashions — were arrested and will be questioned about the fire amid reports that many workers trying to escape the blaze had been locked inside. The officials were arrested Wednesday at their homes in Savar, the Dhaka suburb where the factory is also located.

Rahman did not identify the factory officials or give their job status.

Local TV reports said about 3,000 garment workers held protests over the fire, blocking roads and throwing stones at some factories and vehicles. It was the third straight day of demonstrations.

Police used batons to disperse the protesters, but no injuries were immediately reported.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Your principle of some people being subordinate to others through government decree is more consistent with slavery than my principle that people should be left alone by government.

.

I plan to respond to several of your other posts but this one caught my attention.

Your principle isn't any less consistent with slavery, it just changes the owner.

 

[Greed]

I plan to respond to several of your other posts but this one caught my attention.

Your principle isn't any less consistent with slavery, it just changes the owner.

You can tell me, under my principles, who's the owner and who's the slave, and what is the mechanism used to keep the slave enslaved.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

You can tell me, under my principles, who's the owner and who's the slave, and what is the mechanism used to keep the slave enslaved.

Large employers would be the owners and they would use their financial clout, as they used to do before worker protections were codified.
There are always ways to have smaller, more efficient government but it must be strong enough to battle the ever growing clout of Big Business. Recklessly shrinking government (which is really just putting people out of work) would create a vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum.

 

[Greed]

Large employers would be the owners and they would use their financial clout, as they used to do before worker protections were codified.
There are always ways to have smaller, more efficient government but it must be strong enough to battle the ever growing clout of Big Business. Recklessly shrinking government (which is really just putting people out of work) would create a vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum.

If this is how large employers do business now and have done it in the past, then how did workers ever get rights if employers are as powerful and unconquerable as you make them out to be? And if workers in the past obtained rights despite the efforts of these powerful corporations, then why are modern workers so powerless to obtain their rights compared to past workers?

Isn't that an inconsistency?

 

[Upgrade Dave]

If this is how large employers do business now and have done it in the past, then how did workers ever get rights if employers are as powerful and unconquerable as you make them out to be? And if workers in the past obtained rights despite the efforts of these powerful corporations, then why are modern workers so powerless to obtain their rights compared to past workers?

Isn't that an inconsistency?

They rallied (unionized, if you will) and the government intervened. Big Business didn't decide to implement worker safeties out of their good graces, they did it because government was a strong countermeasure.
Modern American workers aren't powerless but we're not as powerful as we were in the past as corporations imbed themselves deeper into the government, weakening and co-opting it, and union strength ebbs.

 

[thoughtone]

source: NBC News


Wal-Mart Faded Glory, Sean Combs' ENYCE found on fire factory floor


Amid the ash, broken glass and melted sewing machines at what is left of the Tazreen Fashions Ltd. factory, there are piles of blue, red and off-white children's shorts bearing Wal-Mart's Faded Glory brand. Shorts from hip-hop star Sean Combs' ENYCE label lay on the floor and are stacked in cartons.

An Associated Press reporter searching the factory Wednesday found these and other clothes, including sweaters from the French company Teddy Smith, among the equipment charred in the fire that killed 112 workers Saturday. He also found entries in account books indicating that the factory took orders to produce clothes for Disney, Sears and other Western brands.

Garments and documents left behind in the factory show it was used by a host of major American and European retailers, though at least one of them — Wal-Mart — had been aware of safety problems. Wal-Mart blames a supplier for using Tazreen Fashions without its knowledge.

The fire has elevated awareness of something labor groups, retailers and governments have known for years: Bangladesh's fast-growing garment industry — second only to China's in exports — is rife with dangerous workplaces. More than 300 workers there have died in fires since 2006.

Police on Wednesday arrested three factory officials suspected of locking in the workers who died in Saturday's fire, the deadliest in the South Asian country's less than 35-year history of exporting clothing.

Local police chief Habibur Rahman said the three will be questioned amid reports that many workers trying to escape the blaze had been locked inside. He said the owner of the factory was not among those arrested.

The three officials were arrested Wednesday at their homes in Savar, the Dhaka suburb where the factory is also located. Rahman did not identify the officials or give their job status.

About 1,400 workers worked at the plant, some 70 percent of them women. Most are from the north, the poorest region of Bangladesh.

Workers who survived the fire say exit doors were locked, and a fire official has said that far fewer people would have died if there had been even one emergency exit. Of the dead, 53 bodies were burned so badly they could not be identified; they were buried anonymously.

The fire started on the ground floor, where a factory worker named Nasima said stacks of yarn and clothes blocked part of the stairway.

Nasima, who uses only one name, and other workers said that when they tried to flee, managers told them to go back to their work stations, but they were ignored.

Dense smoke filled the stairway, making it hard to see, and when the lights went out the workers were left in total darkness. Another worker, Mohammad Rajib, said some people used their cellphones to light their way.

"Everyone was screaming for help," Nasima said. "Total chaos, panic and screaming. Everyone was trying to escape and come out. I was pulling the shirt of a man. I fainted and when I woke up I found myself lying on the road outside the factory.

"I don't know how I survived."

Rajib said the factory conducted a fire drill just three days before the fire broke out, but no one used the fire extinguishers. "Only a selected group of workers are trained to use the extinguishers. Others have no idea how to use them," he said.

The AP reporter who examined the factory Wednesday saw dozens of fire extinguishers with tags indicating they were inspected early this month. Many appeared unused.

Workers expressed support for the factory owner, Delwar Hossain. Rajib said he is "a gentle man" who heeded workers when they protested for more pay and against rough behavior by some managers.

"He took action and fired some of them," he said. "He did not sack any worker. He told us: 'You are my people. If you survive, I will survive.'"

Most the fire's devastation took place on the second and third floors. Sewing and embroidery machines and tables burned to ashes, ceiling fans melted and floor and wall tiles were broken, apparently because of excessive heat. Thick black ash covers everything in the upper floors of the eight-story building.

Much of the clothing on the lower floors was incinerated. Nightgowns, children's shorts, pants, jackets and sweat shirts were strewn about, piled up in some places, boxed in others. Cartons of kids' hooded sweaters, off-white with red and black print, were marked "Disney Pixar."

There were also at least four register books listing buyers including Wal-Mart, Disney, Sears and other companies. Also listed was Li & Fung, a Hong Kong-based buying house that is among the biggest suppliers of garment products from Bangladesh. Li & Fung issued a statement Monday saying it placed orders at the factory for just one company, Kids Headquarters, and that the value of those orders totaled just $111,000.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and Interior Minister Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir have said arson is suspected. Police say they have not ruled out sabotage.

Wal-Mart had received an audit deeming the factory "high risk" last year, said it had decided to stop doing business with Tazreen, but that a supplier subcontracted work to the factory anyway. Wal-Mart said it stopped working with that supplier on Monday.

Calls made to The Walt Disney Company and to Sears Holdings were not immediately returned.

Local TV reports said about 3,000 garment workers held protests over the fire Wednesday, blocking roads and throwing stones at some factories and vehicles. It was the third straight day of demonstrations, and as they did previously, factories in the area closed to avoid violence.

Police used batons to disperse the protesters, but no injuries were immediately reported.

According to local television, most factories in the area closed after opening briefly because of the protests — a common tactic to avoid violence.

 

[Greed]

Bangladesh factory building collapse kills nearly 100

Bangladesh factory building collapse kills nearly 100
By Serajul Quadir and Ruma Paul | Reuters
1 hr 20 mins ago

DHAKA (Reuters) - A block housing garment factories and shops collapsed in Bangladesh on Wednesday, killing nearly 100 people and injuring more than a thousand, officials said.

Firefighters and troops dug frantically through the rubble at the eight-storey Rana Plaza building in Savar, 30 km (20 miles) outside Dhaka. Television showed young women workers, some apparently semi-conscious, being pulled out.

One fireman told Reuters about 2,000 people were in the building when the upper floors slammed down onto those below.

Bangladesh's booming garments industry has been plagued by fires and other accidents for years, despite a drive to improve safety standards. In November 112 workers died in a blaze at the Tazreen factory in a nearby suburb, putting a spotlight on global retailers which source clothes from Bangladesh.

"It looks like an earthquake has struck here," said one resident as he looked on at the chaotic scene of smashed concrete and ambulances making their way through the crowds of workers and wailing relatives.

"I was at work on the third floor, and then suddenly I heard a deafening sound, but couldn't understand what was happening. I ran and was hit by something on my head," said factory worker Zohra Begum.
An official at a control room set up to provide information said 96 people were confirmed dead and more than 1,000 injured. Doctors at local hospitals said they were unable to cope with the number of victims brought in.

CRACKS IN BUILDING

Mohammad Asaduzzaman, in charge of the area's police station, said factory owners appeared to have ignored a warning not to allow their workers into the building after a crack was detected in the block on Tuesday.

Five garment factories - employing mostly women - were housed in the building, including Ether Tex Ltd., whose chairman said he was unaware of any warnings not to open the workshops.

"There was some crack at the second floor, but my factory was on the fifth floor," Muhammad Anisur Rahman told Reuters. "The owner of the building told our floor manager that it is not a problem and so you can open the factory."

He initially said that his firm had been sub-contracted to supply Wal-Mart Stores Inc, the world's largest retailer, and Europe's C&A. In a subsequent interview he said he had been referring to an order in the past, not current work.

Wal-Mart did not immediately respond to requests for comment. C&A said that, based on its best information, it had no contractual relationship with any of the production units in the building that collapsed.

The website of a company called New Wave, which had two factories in the building, listed 27 main buyers, including firms from Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Canada and the United States.

"It is dreadful that leading brands and governments continue to allow garment workers to die or suffer terrible disabling injuries in unsafe factories making clothes for Western nations' shoppers," Laia Blanch of the U.K. anti-poverty charity War on Want said in a statement.

November's factory fire raised questions about how much control Western brands have over their supply chains for clothes sourced from Bangladesh. Wages as low as $38.50 a month have helped propel the country to no. 2 in the ranks of apparel exporters.

It emerged later that a Wal-Mart supplier had subcontracted work to the Tazreen factory without authorization.

Buildings in the crowded city of Dhaka are sometimes erected without permission and many do not comply with construction regulations.

http://news.yahoo.com/garment-factory-building-collapses-bangladesh-25-dead-tv-051140268.html

 

[muckraker10021]

Bangladesh factory building collapse kills nearly 100

By Serajul Quadir and Ruma Paul | Reuters

April 24, 2013

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/24/us-bangladesh-building-idUSBRE93N06P20130424

DHAKA (Reuters) - A block housing garment factories and shops collapsed in Bangladesh on Wednesday, killing nearly 100 people and injuring more than a thousand, officials said.

Firefighters and troops dug frantically through the rubble at the eight-storey Rana Plaza building in Savar, 30 km (20 miles) outside Dhaka. Television showed young women workers, some apparently semi-conscious, being pulled out.

One fireman told Reuters about 2,000 people were in the building when the upper floors slammed down onto those below.

Bangladesh's booming garments industry has been plagued by fires and other accidents for years, despite a drive to improve safety standards. In November 112 workers died in a blaze at the Tazreen factory in a nearby suburb, putting a spotlight on global retailers which source clothes from Bangladesh.

"It looks like an earthquake has struck here," said one resident as he looked on at the chaotic scene of smashed concrete and ambulances making their way through the crowds of workers and wailing relatives.

"I was at work on the third floor, and then suddenly I heard a deafening sound, but couldn't understand what was happening. I ran and was hit by something on my head," said factory worker Zohra Begum.
An official at a control room set up to provide information said 96 people were confirmed dead and more than 1,000 injured. Doctors at local hospitals said they were unable to cope with the number of victims brought in.

CRACKS IN BUILDING

Mohammad Asaduzzaman, in charge of the area's police station, said factory owners appeared to have ignored a warning not to allow their workers into the building after a crack was detected in the block on Tuesday.

Five garment factories - employing mostly women - were housed in the building, including Ether Tex Ltd., whose chairman said he was unaware of any warnings not to open the workshops.

"There was some crack at the second floor, but my factory was on the fifth floor," Muhammad Anisur Rahman told Reuters. "The owner of the building told our floor manager that it is not a problem and so you can open the factory."

He initially said that his firm had been sub-contracted to supply Wal-Mart Stores Inc, the world's largest retailer, and Europe's C&A. In a subsequent interview he said he had been referring to an order in the past, not current work.

Wal-Mart did not immediately respond to requests for comment. C&A said that, based on its best information, it had no contractual relationship with any of the production units in the building that collapsed.

The website of a company called New Wave, which had two factories in the building, listed 27 main buyers, including firms from Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Canada and the United States.

"It is dreadful that leading brands and governments continue to allow garment workers to die or suffer terrible disabling injuries in unsafe factories making clothes for Western nations' shoppers," Laia Blanch of the U.K. anti-poverty charity War on Want said in a statement.

November's factory fire raised questions about how much control Western brands have over their supply chains for clothes sourced from Bangladesh. Wages as low as $38.50 a month have helped propel the country to no. 2 in the ranks of apparel exporters.

It emerged later that a Wal-Mart supplier had subcontracted work to the Tazreen factory without authorization.

Buildings in the crowded city of Dhaka are sometimes erected without permission and many do not comply with construction regulations.

<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="6"></hr>


A Big Box Store owned sweat shop in Bangladesh collapsed into a twisted pile yesterday, 90 known dead and hundreds still missing. When I say the Walmarts of the world own these sweat shops, I mean it in an economic sense, not in the paper fiction consisting of layers of corporate ownership that they hide behind to evade criminal responsibility. If you or I did the things the Walton family have done behind the bureaucracy of their corporate holdings we would never see the light of day again. That's not to say they are the only ones doing this, the decriminalization of mergers & acquisitions by the Reagan Adm has put most of the world's corporate holdings in the hands of sociopaths.

The fiction promoted by the corporate media is that these garment factories are locally owned, but the margin they operate on is so small that they have no choice but to do exactly what they are told by their corporate masters. It's true that they aren't explicitly told to lock the fire exits and ignore the giant cracks in the concrete, but they'll be joining the ranks of the starving poor if they don't, and they will simply be replaced by someone who will. The thing is, it really doesn't make the poorly made shirt that you buy cheaper, labor is not a big portion of the cost, it just deprives people a living wage, and that is the goal of the Neo-Cons.

http://www.prairie2.com/2013/04/this-is-end-hold-your-breath-and-count.html

<div id="kadoo_video_container_24036541-f1b"><object height="360" width="640" id="video_detector_24036541-f1b"><param value="http://divshare.com/flash/video_flash_detector.php?data=YTo2OntzOjU6ImFwaUlkIjtzOjE6IjQiO3M6NjoiZmlsZUlkIjtpOjI0MDM2NTQxO3M6NDoiY29kZSI7czoxMjoiMjQwMzY1NDEtZjFiIjtzOjY6InVzZXJJZCI7czo3OiIxMzE0NjMzIjtzOjQ6InRpbWUiO2k6MTM2Njg2OTMzNjtzOjEyOiJleHRlcm5hbENhbGwiO2k6MTt9&amp;autoplay=default&amp;id=24036541-f1b" name="movie"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="opaque"></param><embed wmode="opaque" height="360" width="640" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" src="http://divshare.com/flash/video_flash_detector.php?data=YTo2OntzOjU6ImFwaUlkIjtzOjE6IjQiO3M6NjoiZmlsZUlkIjtpOjI0MDM2NTQxO3M6NDoiY29kZSI7czoxMjoiMjQwMzY1NDEtZjFiIjtzOjY6InVzZXJJZCI7czo3OiIxMzE0NjMzIjtzOjQ6InRpbWUiO2k6MTM2Njg2OTMzNjtzOjEyOiJleHRlcm5hbENhbGwiO2k6MTt9&amp;autoplay=default&amp;autoplay=default&amp;id=24036541-f1b"></embed></object></div>

Dead sweatshop workers bodies pile up

 

[thoughtone]

source: ABC

Bangladesh Garment Accident Death Toll Passes 700

Bangladesh rescuers look for survivors and victims at the site of a building that collapsed Wednesday in Savar, near Dhaka, Bangladesh, Thursday, April 25, 2013. (A.M.Ahad/AP Photo)




Hundreds of survivors of last month's collapse of a building housing garment factories in Bangladesh protested for compensation Tuesday, as the death toll from the country's worst-ever industrial disaster passed 700.

The police control room overseeing the recovery operation said the death toll stood at 705 on Tuesday afternoon as workers pulled more bodies out of the wreckage of the eight-story building that was packed with workers at five garment factories when it collapsed on April 24. The factories were making clothing bound for major retailers around the world.

The disaster is the worst ever in the garment sector, surpassing the 1911 garment disaster in New York's Triangle Shirtwaist factory, which killed 146 workers, and more recent tragedies such as a 2012 fire that killed about 260 people in Pakistan and one in Bangladesh that killed 112, also in 2012. It is also one of the deadliest industrial accidents ever.

No one knows what the final toll will be, as the exact number of people inside Rana Plaza at the time of the collapse was unknown. More than 2,500 people were rescued alive.

Bangladesh rescuers look for survivors and... View Full Size


Bangladesh rescuers look for survivors and victims at the site of a building that collapsed Wednesday in Savar, near Dhaka, Bangladesh, Thursday, April 25, 2013.

<!-- bg -->
<!-- empty -->



Hundreds of garment workers who survived the disaster blocked a major highway near the accident site in a Dhaka suburb on Tuesday to demand the payment of wages and other benefits. No violence was reported, although traffic was disrupted for hours.

Local government administrator Yousuf Harun said they are working with the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association to ensure the workers get paid.

The workers, many who made little more than the national minimum wage of about $38 per month, are demanding at least four months in salary. The workers had set Tuesday as the deadline for the payment of wages and other benefits.

Harun said no salary remained unpaid except for the month of April and there was an agreement for the workers to receive an additional three months of pay. After a team from the BGMEA arrived at the protest and pledged to make the payment later Tuesday, the workers left the highway, Harun said.

The BGMEA had said Monday that it was preparing a "complete list" of the workers employed in the factories and they would need a few more days to finish it and to clear the salary.

Bangladesh earns nearly $20 billion a year from exports of the garment products, mainly to the United States and Europe.

Authorities have not set any specific timeframe to complete the recovery operation at the building site, saying they will continue until all bodies and debris are removed.

Officials say the building's owner illegally added three floors to Rana Plaza and allowed the garment factories to install heavy machines and generators.

 

[muckraker10021]

A Final Embrace: The Most Haunting Photograph from Bangladesh

Two victims amid the rubble of a garment factory building collapse in Savar, near Dhaka, Bangladesh.

http://lightbox.time.com/2013/05/08/a-final-embrace-the-most-haunting-photograph-from-bangladesh/#1