"Having a job is a moral obligation and making kids work is good for them"
I wouldn't call myself hardcore conservative but what's wrong with this ? Would you rather have your 15 year old sit home all day playing video games or get a real life job where they could learn a few valuable skills ? Honest question and not trying to troll. As an American, I am seeing our kids being over protected and the result is a bunch of 20 year olds who have no direction and have never faced hardship to prepare for the real world.
The way this debate ends up is odd to me. There's no question about human trafficking or why so many unaccompanied minors have turned up and how they got here. Nothing about whether this is safe and what happens if one of these kids injures themselves. There's no question about what the cost is on local resources to put them in school and whether they are even going to school and how they are doing. There's nothing about the cost to pay for their housing and medicine versus the theoretical economic benefit, etc. No one asks what their health and safety status is or whether they owe anything to cartels. Are they paying half their meager wage to an adult? What happens to the money? Let's not ask who is watching over these minors. Let's not ask where their parents are and whether the parents are exploiting them or immigration laws.
Instead the debate turns to them working. Who benefits from this? It's not even close to being the average person in one of these states.
It's because ultimately they don't care. They've already put their feet down and they believe working is inherently good. So anything that makes more people work is good, even if it involves stuff that rollbacks worker protections.
It's so transparent. The worst part is that these jobs in question suck so badly that the only way they can find workers is by lobbying to grab people who have less labor power. Rather than properly existing as part of a free market and paying people more.
I worked as a child and I worked as a teen. These were safe jobs with well defined boundaries that would not interfere with my education. I don't see much of a problem with that.
This article isn't about legislation giving children a sense of direction are building their fortitude through work. For one thing, I very much doubt there is any jurisdiction with a blanket prohibition on child or youth labour when the work environment is safe and the boundaries are well defined. Child labour laws are about protecting a vulnerable population from the types of abuses that have existed historically. Those protections aren't perfect. For example: having a parent sign a form to grant permission implies parental and government oversight, but it does not guarantee it. On the other hand, it is better than nothing. The motivation of those wishing to remove those protections should be considered seriously, particularly when they tout the supposed benefits to the people they are being put into a position to exploit.
Videogames, 100%. As an aside, I think they positively impacted me and got me interested in computer programming to make my own. But my main point is we are talking about children being trafficked into dangerous meatpacking plants where several were injured!
The benefits of work and summer jobs aren't the stakes here, not being coerced into doing manual labor during long night shifts is. The idea of saying "at least they aren't playing videogames" is so absurd to me, it'd be like looking at a homeless person and saying "at least they aren't wasting money on uber eats!".
> Would you rather have your 15 year old sit home all day playing video games or get a real life job where they could learn a few valuable skills ?
The issue most people take with this is that it compares the best outcome of one version with the worst version of the other. If we want to compare the worst outcomes then we should be talking about the difference between children idling playing video games versus children being exploited in workplaces.
You can just as well say: Would you rather have parents force 12 year olds to clean slaughterhouse floors at night, to make ends meet (oh and this happens partly because child labor of course also depresses parents' wages, so let's please not blame the parents immediately), or would you have them study one day out of 10 because the games really bore them?
There is a pretty big gap between only letting children play games all day and allowing them to participate in high risk labour unsupervised and without special protections.
You only have one childhood. Taking that away from kids to force them into working in factories or lower than minimum wage labor for the sake of appealing to some fantasy that they're learning 'real' skills is bullshit. If we wanted to do that, we'd have more protections and give kids opportunities to sign on with labor unions and get mentorship. That can actually lead to a full and well paying career unlike your laughable McDonald's comparison in another post.
What valuable skills do you expect a kid to have in a slaughterhouse? The jobs are not safe for anyone. They only exist because lax regulation allow hiring of illegal immigrants with little or no oversight. They are the equivalent of Uber rent extraction except they damage your body instead of your vehicle.
I wouldn't call myself hardcore conservative but what's wrong with this ? Would you rather have your 15 year old sit home all day playing video games or get a real life job where they could learn a few valuable skills ? Honest question and not trying to troll. As an American, I am seeing our kids being over protected and the result is a bunch of 20 year olds who have no direction and have never faced hardship to prepare for the real world.