They have created a workforce that will have to labor at a very low wage. The ethics is simple. The minimum wage for a laborer is a living wage. Anything less than that is a slave wage, which is a new form of slavery for our new Teflon-style, no-grip-Legit Empire; strictly legit of course, -- of course. One of the principles of Empire is that it must be done on the backs of a slave labor force.
Only this time the masters have figured out how to make the slaves take care of themselves. The tenant of slavery, of course, is don't pay the slaves wages, but if you're smart at least you see to their minimum nutrition and their health needs. But the idiots in this present Empire are not smart; they're intelligent, but they do not use that intelligence.
With the auspices available in our present societies, an intelligent person would not need an Empire, they would not need slavery, they would not need minimum wage. They would not even need to pay wage packets commensurate with the cost-of-living in any given area or time. An intelligent person would be able to locate and hire any human being on the face of the Earth that needed a job, as well as many others who wanted a better job, and be able to pay them a generous salary and in addition supply full benefits and retirement for career employees, and also become extremely and justifiably wealthy in the process.
You mean, there are people that could, under present conditions of global politics, both dictatorships and democracies, hire anybody who needed work? That might even be over a billion people! You see, if somebody was intelligent enough, that person would not only be fully capable of doing that, but also completely unionizing them and everyone else on the face of the Earth who wanted to be. Ha, ha! I just horrified several hundred thousand people: The ones who have become filthy rich on the backs of those paid less than the minimum wage, if at all. But then, it's unlikely they'd bother to read an article such as this.
It's just that, as Ancient Rome proved, slavery will get you nowhere. It isn't that Rome wasn't built in a day, it's that Rome wasn't bilked in a day. But you see that's the darkness of the mind of man; the aberrations of human thoughts. It's a significant sociological phenomenon that has less to do with the reality around the person as it has to do with the functionality of the thought patterns in any given mind confronting a certain type of problem.
We tend to think of it as a mindset, but it isn't. We don't really know yet, because the morons in the science of psychology have not been able to link their discipline of psychology sufficiently with the actual physiology of the mind itself. Something happens in the synaptic process, and the mindset seems to influence how it goes. It seems to be a matter of how energetic it is, whether or not the thought impulse will produce a shallow result or a profound result.
This may have something to do with the chemistry involved in the mind. Not that ethics could ever be relegated to mere chemistry. But I think it could be approached more accurately, with the type of term that is coined, which we think of as "thoughtfulness". But if you get a little bit analytical you can see that the person with the more detailed thought process, or as it were, mindset, will sort of perk up in a keen interest and fascination in observing the consequences of a positive, or as it were, considerate ethical application of effort.
Despite the often time probability of a backfire, a positive effort is almost always rewarded with a deeply profound result, producing extreme and justified fascination in the thought processes of the individual who initiated the effort.
The reason why these individuals are so rare could perhaps be because it takes a while to realize the positive outcome of many positive efforts. So that those that initiate such efforts for quite some time must do so without perceivable results. For that cause, many give up too soon, imagining that it doesn't pay, and get a "what's-in-it-for-me-?" attitude.
This has helped to contribute to the dismal sociological situations throughout history and in our contemporary existence. Every society is rife with individuals trying to cheat one another out of a living wage by whatever means necessary. And those cheated often include the famous Alambristas that "wade the river" to escape oppressive poverty and to try to find a reasonable life by infiltrating through a porous border of a neighboring country.
And so I have noted here in the southwest corner of the United States, in the beginning of 2005, an influx of underpaid illegal aliens being justified by the wealthy, and in fact now bordering on being permitted legally and legitimized. Many have to sleep rough, often just outside of a construction site or an agricultural site barely subsisting on substandard wages with no health benefits or even a prospect of worker's compensation.
Now that I'm in place here, and can see firsthand, I can also observe the other phenomenon, which I've mentioned at the beginning of this article. That slavery does not pay. It's a parity on the now familiar saying "crime does not pay". But this is not just an idle saying. There are observable results of how this is causing a massive failure, particularly in southwest societies that are foremost in such practice.
I have observed such things since a child, economics itself incorporates its own punishments. It causes the failure of societies that refuse to either acknowledge or realize the utility of ethics. It reminds me of the lesson of the vastly successful businessman in Australia that recovered from alcoholism, or something like that -- forgive me if I've forgotten the precise detail -- and used as a trademark a drawing of his pet parrot on a "T". Beneath the picture is the caption, "on his T". It was explained to me what the full phrase was, and it is so true, even though a play on words: "On his T is the best Pol I see". Of course Pol meaning parrot and on his T is a play on words for "honesty."
This sounds like a sermon or a pep talk, but it isn't. There is a reliability, a science, in the principles of ethics that make it sound economics and the only solid principal for economic and sociological prosperity. Why do you think so many successful companies and endeavors throughout history have been ethical? Because they wanted to be? Well, maybe after a while they got around to wanting to be, but you just might find that most of them were ethical because it worked.