Um not to be crass but like most of the work everyone does on this form is probably close meaningless and often times redundant. I don't mean it in a derogatory way.
And the adjective you should have used is redundant work. Clearly the work has meaning if it keeps people employed and building skills.
But you are advocating against sending free clothes with the goal of creating a scarcity so that people work to produce clothing, which they’ll essentially buy back. This is macabre.
They are advocating not crashing a local industry. How would you fair if your own industry or other local businesses was suddenly destroyed because China decided to give your work away for free in massive overabundance? With zero guarantees that they wont randomly stop supplying on an irregular schedule.
I don't know if that's fair. It could be said that you are advocating for putting people in Africa out of work, messing with local economies, and people's livelihoods.
It seems these trade-offs are involved whenever talking about free trade versus tariffs, helping one group and hurting another.
Whatever we do, it's bizarre to plan "poor people's economies". Whether it's creating internal economies, or sending some aid and wishing an external economy will materialize (but not compete with ours!), the truth is that we are at the same helping and exploiting the third world.
Because doing "meaningless" work is a necessary step toward meaningful work.
Learning & internalizing showing up to work on time, following directions, doing what's needed (even if unpleasant), completing tasks, etc is vital to becoming entrusted with the worthwhile.
Whether individual or national, inability to produce basics prevents realizing future potential. Sure, truckloads of clothing is free - so no need to produce it ... but then nobody knows how to make clothing worth selling/exporting, and remain dependent on truckloads of free donated clothing. Apply same to most other skills & industries, and the country becomes, and stays, an economic basket case.
