Child Labor In America

[Deleted472477User]

Once again I find myself with mixed emotions. Child labor laws originally came into being in order to prevent the exploitation of children who were virtually being enslaved with no recourse.

 

By the same token by disallowing minors to work at all, we prevent some able bodied young people from contributing to the resources of lower income families.

 

Without question there must be a happy medium; and in my opinion this would need to be something with extreme regulations if it were to pass.

 

I agree that children on farms and in many other families are already doing manual labor to help out. If there were a way to enable wages to be paid in such situations and recourse for any abuse of the system put into place, I believe it could potentially work.

 

However, I also strongly believe that the most important thing for all young people is to get an education. It would not do for them to suddenly all be farmed out to labor, just because it was now "ok".

 

That is my opinion, anyway.

 

 

I have to say that I agree with you. The tough part, though, is this:

 

"If there were a way to enable wages to be paid in such situations and recourse for any abuse of the system put into place, I believe it could potentially work"

 

I don't trust any corporation as far as I could throw it to not abuse the system, or not to lobby and schmooze and bribe their way into making it (the abuses) legal.

 

Education has to come first. Jobs are great for kids--I won't argue that--and their families. But this (Gingrich's idea) just smacks of "Oh, who gives an eff, kid's poor, he won't amount to anything, he'll be a low level peon anyway so get him used to it now, who cares if he/she goes to school?" Education isn't the do-all and be all of having a great life (I've seen crap barely above minimum wage positions requiring Associates and even Bachelor's degrees, ffs, and career paths that were excellent and well paying that don't) but it helps.

 

As long as room is made for proper education, and safety regulations, etc are strictly adhered to, it's not a bad idea.

[grannywils]

@Nyxalinth, yep!

[AutoPumpaction]

Problem: a family in poverty

Possible solutions: more jobs' date=' better welfare system/social security,

Proposal: make the kids work, effectively forfeiting any education that they would have gotten despite poverty (at least primary education, its still free over there, no?) [/quote']

 

"Better" Welfare system need more money to pay of the buerocrates which working for it. That means more taxes which will take your money away and then you have poverty no matter how many jobs you have.

Americans are one of the most hard working people on earth. Many have 2 or 3 jobs, working at night but they haven't enough money because robbergangs such as the IRS takes it away from them.

 

If the child will make money it would looking for a job anyway. Farmboys know what i mean because many of them doing jobs during harvest season for money. My dad worked at the farms since he was 12. Don't see a problem with that and on voluntary base it helps the child to generate a doer-mentality.

Edited January 11, 2012 by AutoPumpaction

[cooltrickle]

Problem: Family Poverty

 

Solution: Abolish Privatized Currency.

 

Currently, the US government borrows money at interest from the Federal Reserve when it could just as easily create the money itself at zero interest. The government of any country has the sole right to create it's own currency and does not need to rely on private bodies. There is no reason whatsoever for privatized currency to exist, provided your government does not wish to intentionally cause poverty, in order to justify its existence.

 

For this reason, poverty is a completely unnecessary part of life. It will be eradicated just as soon as the people of every country demand that their government cease borrowing money at interest. Crippling interest that ordinary people have to pay in the form of taxes. There is nothing economical about the economy. It does what it's meant to do; impoverish and dispossess people of their property via taxes. The economy is deliberately inefficient to keep people poor on a global scale.

 

Check out Mike Montagne's Mathematically Perfected Economy for more information on why people have to work two jobs to survive and why we're even considering sending children to the workplace (website and youtube).

 

tl;dr - Why does the government borrow money at interest when it doesn't have to? Why not just create the money itself and us it to build infrastructure and create jobs?

[marharth]

tl;dr - Why does the government borrow money at interest when it doesn't have to? Why not just create the money itself and us it to build infrastructure and create jobs?

Err... inflation?

 

Unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying.

[cooltrickle]

tl;dr - Why does the government borrow money at interest when it doesn't have to? Why not just create the money itself and us it to build infrastructure and create jobs?

Err... inflation?

 

Unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying.

 

Which question are you answering?

 

Are you saying the government borrows money at interest to avoid or mitigate inflation? Or do you mean it's better for the government to borrow money plus interest to pay for infrastructure than just to create money without interest? Surely inflation is the result of creating the unnecessary interest repayments rather than just creating the money itself? If the government did create money itself but it wasted it on useless infrastructure that would devalue the currency, but a competent government wouldn't do that. Or at least, it wouldn't stay in office for long - a population that is not burdened with unnecessary debt will have sufficient free-time to pay more attention to politics and be harder to fool.

 

What's your opinion on Mathematically Perfected Economy?

[marharth]

So you are saying that instead of using the federal reserve the government should just directly create wealth?

[Keanumoreira]

So you are saying that instead of using the federal reserve the government should just directly create wealth?

 

The only problem with that is worth. If it isn't worth anything, then people won't use it. We already print money, and look how that ended up.

[cooltrickle]

So you are saying that instead of using the federal reserve the government should just directly create wealth?

 

The only problem with that is worth. If it isn't worth anything, then people won't use it. We already print money, and look how that ended up.

 

@Keanumoreira

 

Not wealth, currency. The government doesn't need the federal reserve to issue currency. I think people have been deceived into thinking that the federal reserve is somehow capable of doing something the government can't do itself. Any presidential candidate that does not intend to abolish privatized currency should be ignored as they have no intention of dealing with poverty. It's just not possible for *everyone* to work their way out of poverty. Not when people are burdened with unnecessary interest.

 

@marharth

If the government cannot be trusted to issue currency, is it really better to delegate the responsibility to unaccountable people working for the Federal Reserve? At least we can ostensibly remove incompetent politicians from office. What can the public do about reckless board members of a corporation? I think we need only worry about politicians as long as a privatized currency exists. If the government is willing to abolish privatized currency that is proof that it is willing to do it's job properly and can be trusted.

 

Money is just a promise to pay. As long as the person who made the promise can actually pay back the money, it's good. Money is made worthless when people can't pay it back. When money is created, the Federal Reserve, expects that money back. It also expects to be paid interest. The money owed is greater than the money created. How do you pay back money that doesn't exist? By borrowing more money, but that means more interest, and the cycle continues. This cycle ensures that there will be people who cannot pay back what they owe, for as long as privatized currency exists. Industries, jobs, and homes will be lost, as people fall under interminable debt. This is already happening and it won't stop until the Federal Reserve is abolished.

 

I can't really add anymore, so I'll leave my input there. If I can't convince you that interest-bearing currency causes poverty then ask Mike Montagne. He has a channel on youtube, and a website. He gave advice to Ronald Reagan in the 80s; shame he didn't listen. Obama ignored him, too.

[Marxist ßastard]

Gun nut, gun nut, "End the Fed!", gold standard. Are we in Ron Paul's America?

 

Inflation affects working-class people very directly. A poorly-defined "government debt problem" doesn't affect working-class people at all.