¶ … poor countries are somehow "different" than wealthy countries seems absurd. Of course they are different, and their differences are incredible. The people in wealthy countries are generally able to afford a better quality of life and have better access to education than people in poorer countries. Both of these innovations give people in wealthier countries greater access to leisure time, which can result in them being more political and more philosophical. As Sousken points out, "For many people, the alternative to work is starvation. This is particularly true in underdeveloped nations" (2010). When one is concerned about sustenance living, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to find the time and energy to devote to political or philosophical issues. This marks a huge difference between poorer and wealthy countries. It can also change the moral approach that people in poor countries take to certain issues. For example, to many Westerners, the idea of child labor is horrifying, though they will knowingly support firms that use...
However, for the parent of a starving child, the idea of outlawing child labor without first solving the underlying problems that would promote child labor may seem even more immoral.
While there are significant differences between poor and wealthy countries, many of these differences disappear as financial differences disappear. Firms and markets can increase the wealth of poor countries, but they cannot do it simply by investing in the countries. Instead of simply making investments that capitalize on the economic dependence of those countries, they need to invest in ways that raise the standard of living of the workers. This is not an impossible or unrealistic goal, because some companies or industries have already made efforts to pay suppliers, growers, and manufacturers living wages and have contributed to an increase in the standard of living in specific areas.
While the laws of economics seem universal to many, I agree with those social scientists that suggest that…
