joG
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2013
- Messages
- 43,839
- Reaction score
- 9,655
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Sounds like a good organization.
Sounds like a good organization.
.....than working their little fingers to the bone, literally until their small bodies are twisted and sick and coughing themselves to convulsion.
In Bolivia entry into the workforce has been reduced to 10 years of age. The measure is to reduce poverty in the country.
Must we ban imports from the country?
Bolivia congress allows child labor from age 10
We should just have a general rule that companies and facilities we import from keep to US level environmental, safety, and other basic standards.
I don't think that works with the trade treaties we have in place.
I know. and if I were king for a day, I would get rid of those treaties and constitute this instead. We are big enough economy that we can get other countries to play ball as many of them depend on exports for their livelihood.
One of the reasons the US is relatively rich is its openness and free trade.
Originally the Bolivian government didnt want young children working legally, but they continually work in coal mines and there is even a child labor union that was protesting for the right to work and consequently collect unemployment. It was the children themselvesl that wanted to work legally rather than be exploited; otherwise, it would be the same as in the USA when illegal immigrants work for extremely low wages or even no wages such as in the tomato slaves in Florida. If its illegal, then the worker, even an adult, becomes exploited.
Your tomato tied to slavery
So, basically, I'm getting...
"Legal and regulated is better than illegal and unregulated".
From your post.
Sounds like a libertarian paradise.In Bolivia entry into the workforce has been reduced to 10 years of age. The measure is to reduce poverty in the country.
Must we ban imports from the country?
Bolivia congress allows child labor from age 10
This is what happens when the U.S. (and other developed nations) outsource all of their labor to poor nations. The purpose of this is not to allow child labor, which, as Michijo said, is already occurring illegally in Bolivia, but to grant labor rights to the children. In a nation whose economy depends on its exports, banning child labor isn't going to be anymore effective at eliminating it than banning prostitution is here.
But anyone who seriously wants to allow and encourage children working in coal mines (which many people in this thread have expressed sympathy for) are truly deluded.
How are they deluded? (Please don't come back with how wrong they are, which I agree with you on, explain how they are deluded)
Because free choice in the area of child labor (i.e. if they are consenting to it it's okay) is an illusion. A ten year old is not going to have the capability to make an important life decision, and getting a job is an important life decision. The most likely decision a child is going to make is that if their family is suffering economically is to get a job at a young age.
In addition child labor in Bolivia is not working at your parent's store after school, or something mild to that effect. It's hard labor, as has been previously mentioned, such as working in coal mines, where children are in unsafe conditions and are going to be exposed to adverse health effects. In a nation such as Bolivia, criminalization of child labor is not going to solve the problem, but it certainly should not be encouraged.
And forgive me, but are being 'wrong' about a certain issue and being 'deluded' about a certain issue not synonymous in some cases?
And how is the choice unfree?
I agree they should not be doing hard labor.
When dealing with concrete facts that is true, but not when dealing with prudential matters (note that prudential does not mean every answer is right, only that it is not a matter of moral absolutes).
Sounds like a libertarian paradise.
It does, doesn't it? Until one looks at libertarian theory, it really woukd.