4 ms·

You're confused about the definition of minimum age- it means that you can't hire underage children. Let's call what you're saying to be a "soft" minimum age i

You're confused about the definition of minimum age- it means that you can't hire underage children. Let's call what you're saying to be a "soft" minimum age instead of a "hard" one. Then China has a "soft" minimum age of 18, and a "hard" minimum age of 16. Do you think this system is "silly"? If so, and you think there should be no "soft" minimum age of 16, then you really are saying that there should be no minimum age, just strong labour laws. Even 3-year-olds can be hired to work at Apple's factories, as long as they're given appropriate protection. If you don't have a problem with it, then I really don't see what your issue is in the first place.

palish 17y ago
Ahh, but I do have a problem with it. Please see my other comment in this branch.
- Frazzydee 17y ago
  I don't think you understand the policy behind minimum age laws. I posted about it here: http://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=1156177&whence=%74%68%72%65%61%64%73%3f%69%64%3d%46%72%61%7a%7a%79%64%65%65 http://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=1156177&whence=%74%... Suppose we're talking about a really poor country here. Maybe every child is going to be working at a young age, and it'll just be an expected item on the resumé. Also, the kid might have better future prospects getting a factory job, but he won't realize his full potential because his family needed him to work as a child. Had he stayed in school and focused on his studies instead of taking that factory job, a high school diploma would have afforded him a better future than that factory job. He, and society as a whole, would have been better off for it (provided there is a market for jobs better than factory work). If you still don't see my point then we'll just agree to disagree.
  - palish 17y ago
    As someone who dropped out of high school to take a job in the high technogy industry, I can't really relate to "be cool, stay in school" :) What I think we can both agree on is this: selfish parents are a problem, and should not be allowed to put their children at risk. However based on my experience I feel restrictions need to be treated with care, so as not to deny opportunities that make a lot of sense.

palish 17y ago

Ahh, but I do have a problem with it. Please see my other comment in this branch.

Frazzydee 17y ago
I don't think you understand the policy behind minimum age laws. I posted about it here: http://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=1156177&whence=%74%68%72%65%61%64%73%3f%69%64%3d%46%72%61%7a%7a%79%64%65%65 http://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=1156177&whence=%74%... Suppose we're talking about a really poor country here. Maybe every child is going to be working at a young age, and it'll just be an expected item on the resumé. Also, the kid might have better future prospects getting a factory job, but he won't realize his full potential because his family needed him to work as a child. Had he stayed in school and focused on his studies instead of taking that factory job, a high school diploma would have afforded him a better future than that factory job. He, and society as a whole, would have been better off for it (provided there is a market for jobs better than factory work). If you still don't see my point then we'll just agree to disagree.
- palish 17y ago
  As someone who dropped out of high school to take a job in the high technogy industry, I can't really relate to "be cool, stay in school" :) What I think we can both agree on is this: selfish parents are a problem, and should not be allowed to put their children at risk. However based on my experience I feel restrictions need to be treated with care, so as not to deny opportunities that make a lot of sense.