• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    People have been talking about this for a while…

    Local producers can’t beat the price/quality of used Western clothes, so donating clothes actually hurts their society and prevents them from growing their own industries. So if we keep donating, theyll never become self sufficient.

    It’s a tricky situation

    • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      so donating clothes actually hurts their society

      No, it hurts their industry, their society is benefited by the poorest people having decent clothes they can actually afford. Their society isn’t hurt by a lack of local sweatshops where children wearing rags stitch together clothing they could never afford to buy.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Think about how many people get a job selling the used clothes for low wages to how many would work in a textile factory…

        And making their own clothes doesn’t mean becoming a sweatshop for the rest of the world.

        I have no idea about what their child labor laws are, but I doubt only children would work in textile.

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s Africa. Most countries don’t have or follow child labor laws. Sweatshops across the continent will not be any better than the Asian ones that currently supply the west. A ban would initially see domestic small businesses fill the gap, but within 1-2 decades the continent would be dominated by industrial sweatshops and most of the profits would go to < 1%.

          Why should we think about the domestic capitalists profit margins anyway, instead of the significant increase in resource consumption this ban would cause (textile, carbon, and land)… The increase in demand for first use textiles alone would drive up the cost of textiles everywhere.

          Textile businesses failed all across the west due to globalisation. The solution has never been to ban foreign textile imports. This wreaks of local capitalists trying to monopolise the continents market, so that they can price gouge in the name of “the economy”.

      • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        So their economy is lacking the jobs that industry could provide then. The people having nicer clothes but fewer jobs might not be as positive as a trade off as it might seem.

      • zerfuffle
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Jobs are incredibly important for a capitalist society.

    • highduc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wonder if they couldn’t focus on other domestic industries instead? More lucrative ones. DW say 59,000 tons of clothes end up being thrown in the desert so it doesn’t seem like there’s a need to create even more clothes.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As much as I hate corporate subsidies, I think what would be better is letting the people making clothes, sell the donations rather than just the current resellers who aren’t contributing anything meanful.

        They can use the profits to reinvest into making their own. Eventually they’d be able to match the quality of used clothes, which would create meaningful job growth instead of a few clerks working at resale shops while the owners make huge profits.

        Like I said, it’s complicated

      • PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocksB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

        DW

        Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

        I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

    • Floey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why is making a resource there is already an abundance of necessary for growth? Even if there is no room for any other kind of industry you could then move onto the service sector.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, the percent of what is actually sold and what is donated would be good info.

        Like, are we shipping and fumigating 10 tons of clothes and only 1 ton eventually gets sold and the other 9 just goes in someone else’s dump halfway around the world?

        This is one of those things where it’s entirely possible we’re making problems worse by trying to help. Just the carbon costs shipping it would be significant.

      • pHr34kY@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Real westerners outgrow their clothes before they outwear them. Even in their 20s and 30s.

    • criticon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh the other hand, if they have no issues with clothing they can use resources for another type of industry