Chilean activist destroys student debt papers worth $500m

[Bereta_Eder]

Then why is child labor banned?
It makes sence financially.
It's a political decision based on morals and transposed to the economy.

[Kidlicious]

Then why is child labor banned?
It makes sence financially.
It's a political decision based on morals and transposed to the economy.

It is banned for the reason you state. There would only be an issue if you said it creates wealth.

[Bereta_Eder]

It does create wealth given some ways of arranging the economy, that's what I said.

The point is that it is fobidden by a political act, not by the "forces of free markets themselves".

(actually these try to re-instate it in the infamous sweatshops even in Europe and maybe in the US too)

[Kidlicious]

It does create wealth given some ways of arranging the economy, that's what I said.

The point is that it is fobidden by a political act, not by the "forces of free markets themselves".

(actually these try to re-instate it in the infamous sweatshops even in Europe and maybe in the US too)

Which neo-classical economists are you referring to that believe in child labor?

[AAAAAAAAH!]

Then why is child labor banned?
It makes sence financially.
It's a political decision based on morals and transposed to the economy.

Personally I don't see how it makes sense financially to have kids working instead of getting an education.

[kentonio]

Personally I don't see how it makes sense financially to have kids working instead of getting an education.

Most people don't need all those years of education in order to perform in their eventual job role. If all you cared about was getting value from each citizen, then you'd put them into work much earlier.

[Kidlicious]

Also tax them

[Bereta_Eder]

Which neo-classical economists are you referring to that believe in child labor?

The point was not child labor per se or the profitability of it for any given society but that since there is demand for child labor across the world but that demand is not met by supply that means there's an arbitrarily imposed limit on free markets.

Such a limit can expotentially be expanded to everything according to the moral values of each society.


You say, children are not forced to work because that gives more profits to society.
So that it's actually free markets that have directed to no child labor but child education.

I say it was a conscious decision imposed on the financial system and derived from moral stance.

Who of us is right?
Who knows

[Kidlicious]

The point was not child labor per se or the profitability of it for any given society but that since there is demand for child labor across the world but that demand is not met by supply that means there's an arbitrarily imposed limit on free markets.

Such a limit can expotentially be expanded to everything according to the moral values of each society.


You say, children are not forced to work because that gives more profits to society.
So that it's actually free markets that have directed to no child labor but child education.

I say it was a conscious decision imposed on the financial system and derived from moral stance.

Who of us is right?
Who knows

It doesn't matter to me if child labor creates wealth. I'm against it for moral reasons. For similar reasons people once said women shouldn't work. Because work sucks and only men should have to do it. So only adults should have to work. Allowing women to work creates wealth just like allowing children to work creates wealth. Of course they won't get an education, but a lot of them will never even learn how to add fractions anyway.

But what you are saying is that regulating the economy creates wealth. No. It doesn't. Deregulation and low taxes creates wealth.

[Bereta_Eder]

I'm sure you see your ideological inconcistency right there.

You don't care if banning children from work deprives society from some more dollars.
You accept it, as moral necessaity.

Is there any thing more to say?

(if you want to dwelve deeper, even ask yourself to whom those extra dollars will be lacking)

[Kidlicious]

I'm sure you see your ideological inconcistency right there.

You don't care if banning children from work deprives society from some more dollars.
You accept it, as moral necessaity.

Is there any thing more to say?

(if you want to dwelve deeper, even ask yourself to whom those extra dollars will be lacking)

Argh! No. From a purely economics stand point children should be allowed to work. It creates wealth. Economics has nothing to do with morality.

[Bereta_Eder]

But free markets and wealth creation must be obeyed.

Why are you disobeying it?


Because of morality?

Well, there'e even more moral people than you and me

[Kidlicious]

But free markets and wealth creation must be obeyed.

Why are you disobeying it?


Because of morality?

Well, there'e even more moral people than you and me

We can create wealth without allowing children to work.

[AAAAAAAAH!]

Most people don't need all those years of education in order to perform in their eventual job role. If all you cared about was getting value from each citizen, then you'd put them into work much earlier.

How do we know which children will end up with which eventual job role?

[Bereta_Eder]

We can create wealth without allowing children to work.

Of course, and very happy you agree.