In India cotton increased by doubled amount of its original production as seen in Document 1, but this only would’ve happened by filling job openings the machines came with based off the evidence in document 6. The Indian economist, Mukerjee, is in favor of the private investors for bringing mechanization to India because it will increase trade throughout the global trade networks connecting India to more parts of the world.
Although Japan was later mechanized in cotton production, its increase of cotton yarn from year 1884 to 1914 held higher percentage than India, in conclusion Japanese economies also gained a better profit which would lead to connections to other parts of the world by exporting cotton. The vast amount of production in the cotton industry had employees from the working and lower class.
Contained in Document 5, Japanese cotton corporations paid their workers very low wages by taking advantage of the surplus of people having the status of unemployment, an outcome of this is possible capitalism so the worker could not save money and try to start a business of his own. In comparison, India paid low wages in result to capitalism as well, but also permits a worker for only two years maximum because possible over-usage of workers reducing speed production represented in Document 9.
A document from a factory owner containing the profits over the time of the cotton boom would be helpful in understanding the wages of employees being so low because its possible the owner had little money to give after buyingthe machines to produce cotton and also to payback its investors. With all the new mechanization and unemployment on the high, companies hired many workers. However, Japan hired giant amounts of women compared to India.
Indian workers in the cotton industry mainly consist of males because when under British ruling, women and children had labour laws where they could only work certain amount of hours that was less than males. Document 7 details the decline of women employees of years 1909-1934 because of these laws in place. However, Document 7 shows Japanese consistency of percentage in women employees because the Japanese society didn’t have any labour laws and women were cheaper to pay.
Japanese families lived in poverty and saw their daughters as a way to have another source of income, because of subsistence farming most rural Japanese farmers sent their daughters to work for the good of the family in conclusion of document 4. We are given in document 3 the treatment and conditions on japanese workers through a personal recalling. The remembrance of her sister who died because of the work conditions could have altered her story, making the factory work seem much worse than what it might have been.
However, if we had obtain a additional document containing the same standard of an Indian worker in the cotton industry showing how life was in the factories we could better compare and contrast the two countries work life. A personal letter to the workers family could show exaggeration of factory life similar to the one in Japan making a more fair comparison. Document 8 and 10 both photos taken by official documentors shows reliable source as documents. Both representing a picture of how factory working was like in India and Japan with different gender workers between the two countries.
India however in document 10 is using mechanized machines compared to document 8 where women are handweaving cotton. In document 10 we can see more amount of yarn compared to 8 showing India thriving faster then in Japan factories that aren’t mechanized yet. The 1880s-1930s was a time where their was a economic boost for both Japan and India as well as employment rises but wages remain for the workers, however these countries differed on the workers they employed on gender and amounts.