I think "child labour" being unnacceptable is a pretty new concept. On one hand "childhood" is, I think, a relatively new concept - at least the idea that you

I think "child labour" being unnacceptable is a pretty new concept. On one hand "childhood" is, I think, a relatively new concept - at least the idea that you are somehow incapable of doing things once you can walk. Children all across America do minor chores today, but in earlier eras those chores may have been much more physically intense. Children being able to not work is, IMO, just another luxury that specialization has brought to society. In addition to childhood being a new concept I think it's also a concept that isn't consistently understood globally with some societies seeing eighteen as the margin of adulthood, America seems to view 21 as the common margin of adulthood, and in developing countries that barrier to adulthood is going to be a lot lower - a larger proportion of children will be required to be self-sufficient at a younger age. That all said - I don't feel any hesitation in forcing companies that deal in western markets to obey western ideas around childhood. Economic hardship isn't easy to solve, but openly allowing companies with the ability to bear the cost to exploit the dissonance around when adulthood happens internationally to further their own profits is something that's very easy to come down hard on. If Apple, as an example, felt morally compelled to allow child labour to raise families out of poverty they could, alternatively, just dedicate more money to charitably funding social programs in those countries instead... but that's specifically for the case where money is entering a country from outside - domestic child labour is a more complicated issue and I feel like it is significantly more justifiable to ensure that people gain better access to health, safety and good lives.