Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The industry can correct itself or die off. If no one wants a product at a humane price then the industry should go extinct in a functioning society. Okay, but is there a functioning society? Is there some welfare system where these people could take refuge? I don't think so. These workers come all the way from some place where their situation wouldn't be any better, otherwise that's where they'd stay. Should the i…
That's exactly what the southern slave owners tried claiming as well... and some slaves chose to stay because they believed the alternative would be worse. It doesn't mean we should support inhumane treatment of other people so that a handful of "Farmers" can get rich.
That's not my argument. Of course, if a slave owner has to give up on their "property", they're not gonna provide housing, food and equipment to their former slaves anymore. The price of labor kicks in.
Perhaps that price is lower than keeping a slave, perhaps it is higher. There's some arguments as to why free workers are actually cheaper. In any case, that price is always in flux.
You're not going to discover that price while maintaining slavery, because the slaves have no opportunity to name their price. That's why the slave owner's argument is invalid.
By contrast, the workers at these farms do have the choice. Nothing forces them, besides their own economic situation. They have no claim to welfare, no other skill that would pay better.
> It doesn't mean we should support inhumane treatment of other people so that a handful of "Farmers" can get rich.
By and large, farmers don't get rich. They're under price pressure from the store chains that buy their produce. Those store chains don't get rich either, they're under price pressure from consumers. Margins are razor-thin.
We can all stop buying strawberries and let those farms go bankrupt, everything will be strictly worse.