The issue of working conditions in developing countries, and their impact on the US economy, is famously complex and tricky. Simplistic suggestions that the US should stop "doing business" with, or penalize, countries whose labor standards do not equal our own are silly and could -- if embraced -- have disastrously negative consequences for our own economy, as well as the economies of many developing countries.

Apropos of this, Nicholas Kristof authored a very thought-provoking Op-Ed piece in the New York Times on June 6. In it he extolled the virtues of sweatshops, arguing that, as bad as they are, they offer better employment opportunities, better conditions, and better financial rewards than other alternatives available to a vast array of working age people in the developing world. I'm not willing to go quite as far as Kristof in singing the praises of sweatshops. Many countries -- including China -- have failed to enforce their existing labor laws, and conditions in their factories -- while improving -- still have a long way to go. But Kristof performed a huge service by reminding us of the need to put the issue of sweatshops into perspective. A knee-jerk inclination to shut them down, whether voiced by well-meaning campus activist, union organizations, or protectionist politicians, is neither responsible nor sustainable.

Remember -- 100 years ago this country was rife with sweatshops, and many of the rights we take for granted today were barely a dream for the factory workers of that era. We, too, still have a long way to go, but we have also traveled a great distance. We should always keep this in mind as we explore new and creative ways to enable and empower workers in the developing world to do the same.