this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
775 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2387 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Plavatos 183 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (31 children)

Wondered where I remembered him from, it was this juxtaposition of photos:

Additional context: around the same time Governor Walz (upper) was signing a bill for guaranteed school lunches the Governer of Arkansas (lower) was signing a bill rolling back protections on child labor.

https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/gov-tim-walz-signs-universal-school-meals-bill-into-law/

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/10/1162531885/arkansas-child-labor-law-under-16-years-old-sarah-huckabee-sanders

[–] [email protected] 50 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Those poor kids going to work in the mines in the lower pic.

[–] Plavatos 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I would also point out, not to give Huckabee any credit, but the silver lining of that bill might allow kids trying to gain freedom from abusive homes, permitting them to go job hunting on their own (although 14/15 seems super young regardless - they couldn't without someone signing off otherwise). The downsides is parents forcing kids to go to work in dangerous jobs (to your point).

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad 20 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

freedom from abusive homes, permitting them to go job hunting on their own

While i see what you're saying, i think the lede is buried. the important change in law is here:

The state also no longer has to verify the age of those under 16 before they take a job.

The state isn't even checking how old these children are. And the younger a kid is, the more easily they are exploited. And the power dynamic between boss and kiddo is worse. All this will do is make kids easy to exploit

I don't have to tell y'all, right? How many hours got stolen from you as kids? Or what kind of crap did you put up with before you knew better?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

Without laws letting child workers maintain their own bank account in their own name without parents being co owners allowed to drain it at any time, children working become money pinatas for abusive parents.

I say this as someone who would have benefitted from being independent earlier. My uncle did have me work at 14, and when I went to the bank I found he had stolen every penny, and because I was a minor I had no legal recourse to get it back.

A few years later the courts emancipated me, but it didn't return the money he had stolen. Mind you, he was not working at the time himself and he got a few hundred from the state a month to care for me, and he spent what he stole on computer parts so he could game.

Children working only is in the child's benefit if there are ironclad laws allowing them to keep their money, and right now there is not.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)