In "Sweatshops and Globalization" by Radley Balko, a more realistic approach to sweatshop labor is taken. Balko tells of a couple who traveled to Asia where they observed the working conditions at a local factory. At first they were outraged at the sweatshop setting but soon realized that it was a way of life for the people who worked there. The people who work in sweatshops depend on their wages, no matter how minimal, for survival. As Balko puts it, "it is the best of a series of bad options." (Street 338). Obviously, boycotting and public pressure has gotten results for sweatshop conditions. However, Balko argues that maybe these results are not towards the benefit of the sweatshop worker. As mentioned earlier, when companies are exposed for having sweatshops in certain countries, they pull their factories out of those countries, resulting in a worse situation for the workers than they were already in. Balko also points out that any developed country today was once a developing country, which employed child labor in its early stages of development. Taiwan is a newly developed country that used sweatshop labor in its early stages. India however has refused for many years to accept foreign exploitation which has in turn brought upon massive amounts of poverty and devastation to the people of India. Balko presents a few instances of common ground between anti-sweatshop activists and free traders. As long as workers are employed in factories by their own free will then there is nothing wrong with the factory. If workers don't have the choice to quit working then the "benefits of globalization are tainted." (Street 341). Also, any human rights violations should be made public in order to prevent future occurrences. Overall, Balko offers a very valid opposing view to those against sweatshop labor.…
