Part V: Inspection of Imports

The hospitals begin to fill a bit more day by day, people complaining about stomach pains, headaches, and nausea.  Those who are too young, too weak, or too old fall ill and die. The heart of America is struck as the epidemic sweeps the country. The cause is mysterious, but as the CDC begins to dive in, they realize it's not a virus or a disease. No, the root of the problem is poison.

Where could the poison be coming from? Alongside the FBI, the CDC begins to investigate the food industry. This industry is chosen as the first subject, because it is the most accessible way to poison the entire county. It takes a week from the first death for it to be determined that the apples are causing the problem. A recall is placed hastily, and warnings sent out across the country.

But it's too late for a portion of the population, The elderly and the children that were exposed are already gone. Questions from the American People arise. 

"Why wasn't this food expected?"

"What about quality insurance and general guidelines/standards?"

"How did this happen?"

"Why are we trusting other countries with out food supply?"

The questions roll in, outrage flowing freely through the American people.When statements are finally made, the answer is simple: The policy has been this way for years, and will likely not change. The food is grown or produced overseas, brought to America, and quickly resold for a profit. This meant that the apples were not checked, ultimately leading to the death of plenty of Americans. 

While this may seem like an extreme situation, and is, it exemplifies the need to check what we are putting into our own bodies. While poisoning may not necessarily be an issue, other substances in our food or poor farming techniques can directly impact you and those around you. Always be safe, always pay attention!

Part IV: Does the death toll bother the companies, or even the people?

Whether Americans know it or not, Nicaragua accounts for a large portion of the lobsters that America imports. These lobsters are caught almost entirely through the hard, dangerous work of locals who dive to catch the creatures. Those that live on the coast of Nicaragua know lobster diving all too well. It's dangers have led to the deaths of plenty of people in the community. So, why is lobster diving so dangerous and why does it continue to be practiced?

The divers are not given training or proper equipment, and therefore diving has numerous risks  on top of the risks already present in diving with safe practices. The bends, or decompression sickness, is a common occurrence among divers who have no way to measure time or depth. These divers know the risks, but continue to take a chance every day in order to bring home money to their families. Lobster diving is a very common occupations and usually pays fairly well, so the divers will take the risk for the reward.

Companies neglect the workers needs, leading to more and more deaths, making lobster diving one of the most dangerous careers in the world (Timmerman). The companies don't change, simply because they don't have to. The cost of proper training and equipment is not worth saving the lives of a few divers, in the eyes of these major companies. The cost would greatly outweigh the reward, and therefore companies won't go out of their way to make any changes, especially when they aren't being forced to. The only way to improve the conditions of lobster diving, seems to be to cease the practice.

Part III: The American Palate

The United States of America imports the most bananas out of all the countries in the world. Therefore, the US market has major influence. The majority of Americans eat one species of banana, one out of over 1,200 species (Timmerman). This creates a problematic farming industry. Some may say that this problem falls back solely on the companies, but it really falls back on Americans and their palate.

Banana consumers are accustomed to a single type of banana, meaning this species is over grown and over harvested. Recently, this has begun to cause even more problem in the industry than normal. Not only is the land overworked, but bananas have started to become diseased due to these poor farming practices. Americans are known to be very picky consumers in the world market. This means that even of the one species we eat, about 15 percent are not shipped to the US because they aren't the American idea of what a banana should look like (Timmerman). If the American palate would expand, letting in the idea of trying things that we might not be accustomed to, it would help the industry tremendously.  Companies won't change what they provide, until we change what we want. And for now, Americans want the bright yellow, soft, semi-sweet banana they have been getting for a multitude of years.

Part Two: Slavery and Child Labor

The Truth Behind the Corporate Veil

"By 2020 we expect to do away with the current policies that our customers seem apprehensive about (Timmerman 89)," she said as she pushed her glasses up. Those in the meeting room shuffled through thick stacks of papers, staring at various charts and graphs, analyzing data as they listened to her talk. "Child labor and slavery are not topics our company can turn a blind eye to anymore. As consumers are given more access to information, their wants and needs are developing. Therefore, we must produce chocolate only containing 100% certified cocoa by 2020 (Timmerman 89). This means we will have to rewrite our business agreements with cocoa farmers and have them all in agreeance with our new policies by this time."

She paused, picking up her water bottle and taking a sip. She looks around the room and ensures no one has dosed off or fallen asleep before she continues her presentation. "In order to be certified, we are required to include strict rules against slave labor and child labor in our contracts. Once we have provided proof that  all our cocoa producers sign these contracts, we will be able to be certified. After that, we expect a sharp increase in sales."

She caught her breath and put her papers down on the table. "Any questions?" she asked with a smile on her face.

The room was silent for a few moments before the intern raised his hand sheepishly. "Yes?" She asked, her voice kind.

He began speaking. "Will we be doing any more than just changing our contracts with the farmers? What about sending investigators and checking up to make sure the work is being done properly? How do we know they are following our rules?" The boy pauses before continuing. "I'm not trying to overstep my boundaries or cross any lines, I'm just curious about how we are truly changing anything."

You could hear a pen drop in the meeting room. As she began to answer, it was obvious that her voice had gone from kind to annoyed. "Well, we are changing our contracts and our coffee is becoming certified. That way our customers know we aren't using slave or child labor. That's what we are truly changing." She flashed a smile to cover up her rude tone and shuffled her papers again. "Any other questions?"

The boy looked up. Instead of raising his hand, he spoke freely this time. "I just don't think it's fair to advertise the company falsely. If you don't enforce the rule, then is it really a rule a all? If our customers found out we were lying to th-"

She interrupted him. "It would cost outrageous amounts of money to actually enforce these rules. And, frankly, if we did enforce them our profit margins would be much smaller. Children and slaves work for the lowest wages and they keep our profit margins in check. Without them, our profit margins would be small, and you and I would both be making less money. It's hard for me to say it, but slave and child labor is so common in these countries that it would be practically impossible to eradicate. There are almost 21 million slaves in the world (Timmerman 65). How do you suppose we stop all of them? So, we make them agree not to use the labor. We don't check up on it, they keep producing for the same price, and our profit increases because our customers see us as a trustworthy brand."

Her pearly whites showed as she stacked her papers for the last time, slid them neatly into her folder and strutted out of the room. The door closed with a thud behind her.

Part One Blog Post: Do our purchases help?

Are we or aren't we helping with our purchases?

According to Harvard, the average American drinks 27.9 oz. of coffee a day, adding up to a 40 billion dollars that the Unites States spends on coffee each year. Most major corporations that sell coffee purchase the beans from poor farmers in foreign counties. As detailed in Where Am I Eating, a book by Kelsey Timmerman, Starbucks and several other large companies obtain at least a portion of their coffee beans from farmers in Columbia. These farmers are underpaid and some would say they are being taken advantage of. These farmers have no knowledge of what the corporations they sell to are or of the value the fruits of their labor hold. When Americans learn of these bad business practices, they tend to boycott and avoid buying from these companies in an attempt to create change and help these workers. So, does boycotting create enough of a stir to help the farmers or do our purchases help more?

Well, yes, our purchases do help the farmers. The more business the companies get and the more bags of coffee beans the company buys, the more money the farmers get. On the other side, your purchase does help the companies more than the farmers. Companies like Starbucks make a much better profit off each bag of coffee sold than farmers do. According to Where Am I Eating, farmers get a bit less than a dollar for every bag of coffee sold. That money may not seem like a lot, but that is enough for those farmers to live off of. If you buy less bags of beans, the farmers get even less money, which is when these workers actually start to struggle. Even if that wasn't a problem, history shows that these major corporations don't tend to change just because of boycotting. They make enough money that even when you boycott, they are not forced to make changes in order to bring your business back. 

Even if a loss in business was enough to make them change their practices, it would most likely take a good portion of time before they decided to give in to the boycotting. Throughout the time protesting and boycotting occurred, farmers would make less money because of the drop in sales. This could make the farmers lives more difficult than they already were. So, no, withholding your business is probably not the best method of protesting and creating change. All in all, your purchases do help and boycotting does hurt. The farmers rely on your business for their source of income, even if they don't know it. Each purchase you make gives that farmer more money as more of their beans are sold. While boycotting may seem beneficial, it has several downfalls that make it a dangerous practice which could harm the farmers more than it helps them. If America really wanted to look out for the livelihoods of those farmers, the most beneficial route would be to continue buying coffee, because every purchase really does help.