3 ms·

Labor is a matter of supply and demand, if companies are using child labor that must mean there is a large demand for labor (adults would likely be more efficie

Labor is a matter of supply and demand, if companies are using child labor that must mean there is a large demand for labor (adults would likely be more efficient at the same task) by removing the child out of the labor pool you increase the bargaining power of his parents. I believe that is why it was originally banned in the United States.

nickff 11y ago
You may increase the wages of the parents, but not necessarily by as much as the family has lost; in fact, there could be situations where a village is no longer worth operating in because the total amount of labor available is not enough to support a viable factory. Much of this depends on the elasticity of demand for labor, the manufacturer's alternatives, and the ease of automating a task. Remember that this is not a power game played by a group of companies on the one side and a bunch of laborers on the other; there are many other factors including mechanization, productivity, consumer demand, etc.
- cmdrfred 11y ago
  > You may increase the wages of the parents, but not necessarily by as much as the family has lost; 1 year out, maybe. 10 years out after the children have had the benefit of education? Dead wrong. Remember also that the local economy scales with prevailing wages. They would experience a period of deflation but that's fine as they have virtually no assets to speak of. > Remember that this is not a power game played by a group of companies on the one side and a bunch of laborers on the other; there are many other factors including mechanization, productivity, consumer demand, etc. In sub $10/day situations mechanization is a tiny factor at best. That machine has to be built in a factory in Germany by highly skilled and expensive engineers it's going to have to be amazing efficient to pay for itself. Then you need skilled labor to work on and maintain it. Adults are more productive than children, and consumer demand would likely go up if you did not use them to produce your goods. The western nations didn't get rid of child labor for altruistic reasons. It's a fools errand.

nickff 11y ago

You may increase the wages of the parents, but not necessarily by as much as the family has lost; in fact, there could be situations where a village is no longer worth operating in because the total amount of labor available is not enough to support a viable factory. Much of this depends on the elasticity of demand for labor, the manufacturer's alternatives, and the ease of automating a task. Remember that this is not a power game played by a group of companies on the one side and a bunch of laborers on the other; there are many other factors including mechanization, productivity, consumer demand, etc.

cmdrfred 11y ago
> You may increase the wages of the parents, but not necessarily by as much as the family has lost; 1 year out, maybe. 10 years out after the children have had the benefit of education? Dead wrong. Remember also that the local economy scales with prevailing wages. They would experience a period of deflation but that's fine as they have virtually no assets to speak of. > Remember that this is not a power game played by a group of companies on the one side and a bunch of laborers on the other; there are many other factors including mechanization, productivity, consumer demand, etc. In sub $10/day situations mechanization is a tiny factor at best. That machine has to be built in a factory in Germany by highly skilled and expensive engineers it's going to have to be amazing efficient to pay for itself. Then you need skilled labor to work on and maintain it. Adults are more productive than children, and consumer demand would likely go up if you did not use them to produce your goods. The western nations didn't get rid of child labor for altruistic reasons. It's a fools errand.