4 ms·

So, this is a bit off topic on a super click-bait-y story, but I think the notion of child labor laws is that we specifically include child labor as statutory a

by hawkice 12y ago

So, this is a bit off topic on a super click-bait-y story, but I think the notion of child labor laws is that we specifically include child labor as statutory abuse, in the same way the basic speed limit law ("don't drive too fast to be safe") is augmented by the more specific and easily enforceable speed limit signs. It'd be great if we had the throughput to actually make wise decisions about such a broad range of potential disputes -- that way, we wouldn't discourage non-traditional calls that might suck up a lot of time -- but I think this is a fair compromise.

KC8ZKF 12y ago
And just like nobody actually thinks they are driving to fast to be safe, nobody would think that the jobs they provide would be abusive. Even long hours in a sweatshop would be randized as providing opportunities in a free market.
- eglover 12y ago
  No. You're turning a fallacy into a bumper sticker. First of all, speed limits are way below the capabilities of how safely cars can move today. Hence, the original federal law that said limits should represent the top 80th percentile of drivers. (That's obviously not used anymore.) Slow can mean dangerous, don't depend on obvious quips for all your thinking. Second, "sweatshops" in the derogatory sense only exist in socialist countries where families are starving to death trying to support the government. If kids didn't work, they wouldn't have food. You know very well they and their parents would prefer that school be an option. Third, the work that these companies provide are NOT inherently wrong. Making clothes? Sounds like a good skill to me. Don't base your "opinions" on some dark imagery you've developed in your head.
  - couchand 12y ago
    speed limits are way below the capabilities of how safely cars can move today Speed limits are for people, not cars.
    - eglover 12y ago
      I can't tell if you're joking or not. Please say yes.
eglover 12y ago
Stop thinking of things in some petty nationalist sense. Communities can handle their own problems in a much smarter and more efficient way.

by hawkice 12y ago

KC8ZKF 12y ago

And just like nobody actually thinks they are driving to fast to be safe, nobody would think that the jobs they provide would be abusive. Even long hours in a sweatshop would be randized as providing opportunities in a free market.

eglover 12y ago
No. You're turning a fallacy into a bumper sticker. First of all, speed limits are way below the capabilities of how safely cars can move today. Hence, the original federal law that said limits should represent the top 80th percentile of drivers. (That's obviously not used anymore.) Slow can mean dangerous, don't depend on obvious quips for all your thinking. Second, "sweatshops" in the derogatory sense only exist in socialist countries where families are starving to death trying to support the government. If kids didn't work, they wouldn't have food. You know very well they and their parents would prefer that school be an option. Third, the work that these companies provide are NOT inherently wrong. Making clothes? Sounds like a good skill to me. Don't base your "opinions" on some dark imagery you've developed in your head.
- couchand 12y ago
  speed limits are way below the capabilities of how safely cars can move today Speed limits are for people, not cars.
  - eglover 12y ago
    I can't tell if you're joking or not. Please say yes.

eglover 12y ago

Stop thinking of things in some petty nationalist sense. Communities can handle their own problems in a much smarter and more efficient way.