Exercise 4.2: Where Sweatshops Are A Dream

Kristof begins his essay by trying to persuade Obama and the people who favor labor standards using his past experiences. The problem he identifies is sweatshops that are in poor abroad countries are not considered a bad thing by most people. Especially those that live in those areas. Kristof assumes his readers are people who favor the labor standards movement. His purpose in this essay is to persuade his audience that fighting off the sweatshops is bad for the poor people who see it as a way to move forward. In order to accomplish this purpose, he appeals mainly to those who follow the labor standards act. In his essay, Kristof addresses the main argument against his thesis, the idea that a job at a sweatshop is a great thing to those who find themselves lucky enough to land one. He refutes the argument by saying "by improving wages and working conditions without affecting the eventual retail cost of goods." Finally, he concludes by making the point that it is hard to believe sweatshops can help people and mentioning a little girl who whose covered in filth making $1 a day by scavenging. Overall, the argument Kristof makes is effective because he uses live sources and pathos to appeal to his audience. Although, it was ineffective because he did very little to refute his argument.