For most opponents of the use of sweatshops in developing countries, the use of sweatshops exemplifies how developed countries exploit developing countries. According to them, this is also a terrific way to open up about how developed countries harm developing economies. Furthermore, as far as globalization is concerned, it is a transition from a more regulated economy to an unregulated economy. The permanent and higher mobility of capital from developed countries means that there is a fundamental alteration in the bargaining power that developed country companies have over individuals working in sweatshops. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The case against international sweatshops The ability of companies in developed countries to move their sweatshops from one location to another. As a result, governments in non-industrialized countries are forced to engage in a bidding war to attract companies from developed countries to set up shop in their countries. In some cases, companies from developed countries can blackmail developing country governments by threatening to withdraw their investments if they are not offered better deals or to withhold investments made in developing countries. This allows large multinationals to drive developing counterparts into bidding wars in which they aim to offer the “best” conditions for these large companies to operate. The end result is that workers in developing countries suffer from low wages and working conditions. Some countries like Indonesia deliberately keep the wages of individuals working in sweatshops low so that they can make their country friendly to the large corporations that create the sweatshops. The end result of this method is that living conditions, working standards and wages have fallen to dizzying levels. Furthermore, there is a growing decline in the real incomes of individuals working in sweatshops and a growing or widening gap that has been created between the poor and the rich. The other argument put forward by opponents of the use of sweatshops is that companies operating in developing countries command slave wages. The wage level that these companies have considered adequate is far from what are considered acceptable wage standards worldwide. They argue that these workers must be paid enough to support a decent standard of living and their families. To some extent, people who work in these sweatshops should be in a position to be better off than worse off even after working. The central claim is that it is corporations that actually impoverish workers in developing countries. According to Skarbek et al. (2012), if the logic of policies implemented in developing countries to improve does not benefit individual workers in sweatshops, but instead benefits some few people who occupy a higher position in developing country economies, then the logic for the possibility of such companies operating there was lost. Furthermore, it is not morally permissible for companies to continue operating in developing countries if the gap between poor and rich continues to widen. It is not only the workers who work in these sweatshops who are constantly exploited, but trade between developed and developing countries continually creates a, 2004)..