Phonom Penh Pro Sweatshop Arugment

Kristof begins his essay by addressing Obama and his team. He then goes on to describe
Phenom Penh as a Dante-like hell and offers to give a tour of the area. 

The problem he identifies is that sweatshops are not being exploited enough. Kristof assumes his readers are unaware of how the locals would prefer to work in a factory then scrounging for income.  His purpose in this essay is to allow the reader to see from the locals point of view on sweat shops and how it helps the families. 

In order to accomplish this purpose, he appeals mainly to pathos. He does this by quoting

some of the mothers saying they wish for the children to be able to work in a sweat shop with a steady income to help raise out of poverty. He also using pathos when stating how the train has ran over multiple children, the children cannot afford to go to the doctor and in the shade. He also appeals logos by stating that the sweat shops are safer for children to work in, smell better and cleaner.

In his essay, Kristof addresses the main argument against his thesis, the idea that labor standards can improve wages and working conditions without greatly affecting the eventual retail cost of goods. He refutes this argument by saying it is more likely that with high wages, the one hiring would often demand brides or some of the wages in order to get the job.

 Finally, he concludes by making the point that even though Americans find it hard to accept, the workers prefer the factory over the alternative work. Overall, the argument Kristof makes is effective because he is showing the positive effects the sweat shops have on the locals.

Where Sweatshops Are A Dream article (and middle picture)
First picture

Last picture