Current Events > Push to lower age of employment to 13 years of age.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Nice. Now kids can develop a stronger anti-work sentiment from a younger age.

To be fair... have you seen Republican politicians talk about rape?

People aren't pushing for these laws because they want children to work a couple hours and make some extra money like they do already. Like I had a paperroute as a kid made decent money for spending an hour a day delievering news papers.

The push is to have children work full shifts so they can avoid paying more for the current work force. Anyone defending this with "but kids already can work now " are ignoring that's there's a lot of restrictions to it and the push is to remove those.

Why are we all of a sudden talking about age of consent right now?

Because some people seem to think discussing lowering the age teenagers can get a job by one year is the same thing as lowering the age of consent and equate it to rape.

it wasn't something i 'had' to do. i wanted to get a job so i could have spending money of my own. getting $100 every 2 weeks was pretty sweet for 14 year-old me. it was not something my parents pressured me into, or anything.

That may have been your situation but thats not the same luxury for everyone. My husband had to work to support his mom and brothers and literally help out food on the table or go hungry. Lowering the minimum age is just corporations looking to further exploit the poor while not increasing wages and living standards. It is predatory.

Do you think he would have been better off if he wasn't given a chance to help support his family?
(To be clear, I was in a very similar situation, and I was happier for that reality over the alternative)

Yeah like....there's a reason we did away with child labor

One of his biggest regrets is he didnt get a college degree. He joined the Army at 18 to send money home. He is extremely smart and great at coding, has a great job. But the lack of CS degree has been a factor in getting additional opportunities for advancement. He is really bitter about not having gone. And it was something very embarrassing for him. His job as a kid was to clean toilets and gunk off school desks while the rich white kids at the school were at summer camp (my husband is Hispanic)

I mean, that didn't really answer the question. I get being bitter about not being afforded the opportunities and having to work harder than everyone else. But that's not really related to what I asked. In an alternate reality where he was barred from supporting his family, does he think he would be better off?

Yes? I literally just explained why.

Except it's already legal for 14 year olds to work in most places and there hasn't been any issues.

So, better to starve? Or is there a magical benefactor in this alternative reality?

So, better to starve? Or is there a magical benefactor in this alternative reality?

No child should have to be in the position to have to work to put food on their familys table. Wages have remained flat while our cost of living has increased. That is what needs to be addressed instead of increasing the pool of child labor to use as fodder. The fact that this point is flying over your head says everything about you.

Let children have a childhood. For fuck's sake.

Let children have a childhood. For fuck's sake.

My point is to fix social safety nets before removing options for poor people to stay afloat because they are unfair.

Most poor people don't give a shit if it is unfair at the end of the day, they care about getting from A->B. Don't remove their ability to get there, unintentionally of course, by making things more "proper fair".

So your solution is to let children be exploited.

Great idea.

Hey, i'd rather that than have been homeless with my disabled mother growing up! But idk. Maybe you would have prefered something different. It's about pragmatics, not ideals. It's not like I'm saying these are my ideals lol.

Hey, i'd rather that than have been homeless with my disabled mother growing up! But idk. Maybe you would have prefered something different. It's about pragmatics, not ideals. It's not like I'm saying these are my ideals lol.

Though any such measure would need to be a voluntary thing. Fuck forcing anyone to get a job that young.

I was told by Republicans that children are impressionable idiots that don't know shit about shit, even who they are attracted to.

How the fuck can a tween volunteer to work for a heartless corporation?

The pragmatic things is to let children be fucking children you absolute bellend.

Give parents better child benefits so they can support their children without taking 3 jobs and forcing their children in to 2 once they can walk.

It's not fucking complicated and all your are doing is supporting the utter ghoulish monsters who want to exploit children so they can make a few more quid.

Fucking hell.

My point is to fix social safety nets before removing options for poor people to stay afloat because they are unfair.

But there is nothing being taken away. They are attempting to lower the age of consent for being able to work. They are fixing absolutely nothing, and are exploiting young people for cheap labour. The pittance you receive to help provide for your family, in whichever financial situation they are in that demands a 13-year-old to work to provide for the family, is lost on the business owners and the government. There weren't enough social systems in place for your family, so you are forced to work or be homeless. At 13. Great fucking society you've got there.

Like most people who try to judge an entire group as a monolith that all think and act the same and have the same intellectual capacity, they are wrong, and you would be wise to treat their advice with caution next time.

Denote the change that's happening here, with respect to a poor person's perspective. What has changed for them?

Nothing, other than having the option to work if necessary. Yeah, systemically it's fucked, but for the poor person all you've done is give an option.

But nothing about keeping it where it is, or pushing it higher, is benefiting the poor, unless it comes with additional social supports. So, just lambasting this change is showing a lack of the ability to put yourself in the shoes of someone who is poor, and might be thrown into that situation, with the world is it is, not how you want it to be.

"You're still poor as shit and suffering, but at least your children can lose their innocence and become broken and jaded too!!"

"You're still poor as shit and suffering, but at least your children can lose their innocence and become broken and jaded too!!"

Denote the change that's happening here, with respect to a poor person's perspective. What has changed for them?

Nothing, other than having the option to work if necessary. Yeah, systemically it's fucked, but for the poor person all you've done is give an option.

But nothing about keeping it where it is, or pushing it higher, is benefiting the poor, unless it comes with additional social supports. So, just lambasting this change is showing a lack of the ability to put yourself in the shoes of someone who is poor, and might be thrown into that situation, with the world is it is, not how you want it to be.

So your solution is to let children be exploited.

Great idea.