I'd never understood this kind of nationalism. I don't care if the items I purchase happen to have been made in the country I happen to live. I want to buy the product that best suits my needs regardless of where it was manufactured.
Sure, if an American product happens to have a higher quality and I'm looking for that, then I can choose to buy it. In that case you can abstract away the manufacturing country, so "made in country X" shouldn't be a factor in any case.
If anything, Western people should buy products from poor countries. It's the best aid they can get.
Some people want to support their own community and some are concerned about labor/environment standards, human rights, civil liberties, etc.
I don't think that's necessary nor ethically justified (though I understand why some people support it). It's like a some kind abstract form of 'cartel', i.e. "I support you, you support me".
However, it's taking money away from poor countries (in this context). I don't think some 'rich' Westerner who happens to live near me is more deserving of my money than a poor person in a third-world country.
>some are concerned about labor/environment standards, human rights, civil liberties, etc.
Ironically, the only way those poor countries will have labour/environment standards, human rights and civil liberties is throug economic growth. If you're poor, you can't afford workplace safety.
It's called "families" and "communities" and is the basis for human civilization. My children aren't going to grow up around poor third world people, nor marry them or raise their own families with them. Some poor third world person isn't going to come to my aid if I'm in trouble. They're not going to be my friends, my coworker, or even the guy who might find my phone and return it to me. They won't be voting for the government that governs me. Any rational person has tremendous incentive to make sure the people closest to them, and more broadly the people in their own body politic are cared for before others.
Let's say there was a fictional country that was the exact opposite of your country : Some kind of dictatorship, with censorship everywhere, people enslaved , etc.
Of course you would not buy a laptop from them, you don't want to give more money/power to this awful country.
Now, if you consider 1 country to be the best, with a score of 100, and that worst country to have a score of 0.
Every other country would have a score between 0 and 100.
Depending on people views about where this country fits , some will be more supporting than other : They would be OK to pay 20% more for the same laptop to a country with a score of 95 instead of 80.
The analogy with the coffee shop of JonFish85 would be : you know your brother is kind with his employees and give them good salaries, whereas the other coffee shop's owner harass his employees and pay them badly. But in both coffee shops , the product is the same, with the same price.
>Ironically, the only way those poor countries will have labour/environment standards, human rights and civil liberties is throug economic growth. If you're poor, you can't afford workplace safety.
Not really, if some company has twice more money, they would just hire more low-cost employees. To have a better workplace safety, either the employees must act, or citizens of that country ( including the employees ) assuming the country is a good democracy. If none of them can, other country can help solve the problem by boycotting products or enforcing regulations.
If you've been watching the situation in the US and EU for the past 5-6 years you might better understand.
If you want, you can construe entirely selfish motives out of it.
It is better if everyone in your community has a job- it brings down crime, for one. So you can personally benefit from buying locally- just in a "trickle down" sort of way rather than a direct one.
To follow the similar selfish motive, why would you care to help third world countries anyway? Even if they collapse in themselves the effect on you will be minimal compared to your city collapsing around you (hi, Detroit)
Whether or not it's worth it in the end: no comment.
Things which are harder to get when you pay an American company,which then pays a Nevis company, which then pays a Chinese company, which then pays Taiwanese and Chinese companies and so on...
In some places it's feasible, in others not so much. But, to each their own, I think. If that's what makes them feel better. Just like if it makes people feel better that their veggies are grown locally vs shipped in, even if the local veggies require more 'human subsidies' (energy, water, fertilizer, etc.) that in places where they grow more readily, so be it.
So given equivalent products built in Detroit and Somalia, you would go for the one built in Somalia?
