We should Ban Fast Fashion
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 8,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
We will be using all definitions from the Merriam Webster Dictionary.
In this debate, we will be discussing if Shein should be allowed to sell to the U.S.
Pros main points appear to be that fast fashion is bad for the environment and takes advantage of it's workers.
While Con argues that whether long or short fashion, either one uses workers,
Pros source in Round 1 says
"The rapid trend cycle, known as micro-trending, encourages the majority of fast fashion companies to engage in unethical labor practices in order to create a high volume of clothing at a low cost."
Pro also argues in round 1 that when a shirt is cheaper, the worker gets paid less, but I would think they make more shirts 'quicker, so if it takes someone a day to make 1 quality shirt worth 10 dollars, it takes someone a day to make 10 shirts worth 1 dollar each,
Maybe what they are paid ought still be equal? So I am unsure about this argument.
Con argues that fast fashion is cheaper, for the consumer.
I don't think this is necessarily true, as one might run through 20 cheap shirts in a year, costing 20 dollars, compared to one expensive shirt in a year worth 10 dollars.
Pro does not make this argument however, focusing more on the cost to the environment,
Which becomes as cost to society as a whole. Stated in round 4 "carbon"
I don't think I read Pro fully addressing Con argument that child labor and sweatshops are not slavery. Not that I 'agree with Con, but it 'is true that children work on farms, and adults agree to work for sweatshops.
Though such ignores laws passed for example in England outlawing child labor because of obvious force, manipulation, disregard for safety, health, wellbeing. Not really comparable to child doing farm chores 'with other family members.
Also ignores sweat shops that coerce workers, or situation that coerces workers into poor conditions, that one 'could argue are slavery.
But these are my arguments, not Pros.
. . .
Conclusion, Pro and Con both offered arguments,
Though I think Cons diverge from what 'I would call norms.
While I 'might agree a person is able to stab themself in the chest if they want or enjoy it, I 'definitely draw the line at that person stabbing their chest 'through my chest.
I find the environmental concerns raised by Pro persuasive.
However, I am not sure Pro fully defends his point of Fast Fashion taking advantage of the workers.
So I am only awarding Pro Sources, everything else I leave as equal, though 'unobjectively, I found Pro more convincing.
Thanks. I will use that argument in last round so he cant respond to it.
Since this debate is practically over I will go ahead and state an uncomfortable fact. The expensive shit uses the exact same slave labor as fast fashion. You can't escape it by banning fast fashion
Yes. Its cheaper.
Do you realize you took the stance that fast fashion should be aloud?
Not sure how that harms nature, but it can be banned anyway.
Like breathing and farting?
Anything which harms nature should be banned, obviously.