sweeping a floor at school for a few bucks is not the same as working as a machinist in a sweatshop. Obama, on the other hand, supports such sweatshops with his special deals for outsourcers that give him bribe money. Those kids are probably making Obama 2012 buttons.

Obama, on the other hand, supports such sweatshops with his special deals for outsourcers that give him bribe money. Those kids are probably making Obama 2012 buttons.

 

This is true

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Newt is advocating removal of child labor restrictions. 15 and 16 yo's can legally work already. The next paragraph:

 

 

 

so, poor kids in poor schools should be put to work, displacing unionized janitors. Funny, but some of those kids' parents would be those same janitors, and now you've just depressed wages for janitorial work while also making their parents unemployed. That's a sure-fire way to rise up out of poverty.

 

Again, why is this man taken seriously?

 

You're delusional and purposefully blowing his statement out of proportion. You might as well have said Newt was calling for slavery to return.

 

He added, "You go out and talk to people, as I do, you go out and talk to people who are really successful in one generation. They all started their first job between nine and 14 years of age. They all were either selling newspapers, going door to door, they were doing something, they were washing cars."

 

"They all learned how to make money at a very early age," he said. "What do we say to poor kids in poor neighborhoods? Don't do it. Remember all that stuff about don't get a hamburger flipping job? The worst possible advice you could give to poor children. Get any job that teaches you to show up on Monday. Get any job that teaches you to stay all day even if you are in a fight with your girlfriend. The whole process of making work worthwhile is central."

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/...l#ixzz1eAVGfCJJ

 

 

 

You're delusional and purposefully blowing his statement out of proportion. You might as well have said Newt was calling for slavery to return.

 

How am I blowing his statement out of proportion? He is literally advocating for displacing unionized janitors with poor children under the age of 14.

How am I blowing his statement out of proportion? He is literally advocating for displacing unionized janitors with poor children under the age of 14.

 

 

I think I just found my candidate since you hate so much.

How am I blowing his statement out of proportion? He is literally advocating for displacing unionized janitors with poor children under the age of 14.

He is saying stop thinking you are too good to work at McDonalds because everyone needs to start somewhere. Geeze, over-react much?

He is saying stop thinking you are too good to work at McDonalds because everyone needs to start somewhere. Geeze, over-react much?

he is calling for dropping the minimum age to work and replacing union janitors with school children. Read the interview.

he is calling for dropping the minimum age to work and replacing union janitors with school children. Read the interview.

You need to take the whole meaning of what he is saying. Get off you ass and work, learn responsibility, take that burger job, whatever, just do it. Quit letting people tell you that you shouldn't. He used janitors as an example.

And for a great example just look at the undocumented workers who risk their lives coming over here to work at minimum wage, entry level jobs

You need to take the whole meaning of what he is saying. Get off you ass and work, learn responsibility, take that burger job, whatever, just do it. Quit letting people tell you that you shouldn't. He used janitors as an example.

 

You need to take in the whole meaning of advocating against child labor laws and in favor of young children working beca use they are poor. He also was specifically ranting against union workers, and the whole idea of ending poverty by firing adults from decent-wage jobs and replacing them with children is pretty funny.

 

He was arguing against laws that restrict children 9-14 from working. You can't get around that. His idea is just dumb, anyways. Again, how is this man taken seriously?

You need to take in the whole meaning of advocating against child labor laws and in favor of young children working beca use they are poor. He also was specifically ranting against union workers, and the whole idea of ending poverty by firing adults from decent-wage jobs and replacing them with children is pretty funny.

 

He was arguing against laws that restrict children 9-14 from working. You can't get around that. His idea is just dumb, anyways. Again, how is this man taken seriously?

I worked at 14. I worked before that. Weeded bean fields at 12, mowed lawns at 12, lied about my age and got a job at Dairy Queen when I was 14 (didn't need to provide your id then, just fill out a job app), worked in a bowling alley at 16. Again, he isn't advocating for 10 year olds to go working at the Ford plant down the block. And do you think it is a BAD thing to teach poor kids some work habits that may benefit them more later in life than anything else?

You need to take in the whole meaning of advocating against child labor laws and in favor of young children working beca use they are poor. He also was specifically ranting against union workers, and the whole idea of ending poverty by firing adults from decent-wage jobs and replacing them with children is pretty funny.

 

He was arguing against laws that restrict children 9-14 from working. You can't get around that. His idea is just dumb, anyways. Again, how is this man taken seriously?

I think you are taking this a little far. I was working in 8th grade, short part time hours, sweeping up and cleaning at a flower/garden shop. Basically janitorial work, and I was probably 13-14 years old. Worked throughout high school too - umpiring little league games, working the desk at the parish office at our church, a little yard work in the neighborhood, even did some babysitting.

 

There is nothing wrong with suggesting that school kids of a certain age should be allowed to work a job like that. The keys to this working are, for one thing, ALLOWED is the key word. Not forced or required. They have an option to do so and make some money. Then of course you need to make sure they aren't being pushed too far, so you have laws (which already exist I am pretty sure) that dictate how many hours a day and/or week they can work, breaks, etc.

 

So really, Newt is not suggesting removing or even reducing child labor laws at all, in terms of protections for a child. What he is aiming at is piercing the union veil. Not saying I agree or disagree on that, but your characterization of what he is saying is incredibly exaggerated and forced.

 

Child labor laws generally prevent 9-14 year old from working outside of family businesses. Newr would like that changed. There is no stretch.

 

 

Child labor laws generally prevent 9-14 year old from working outside of family businesses. Newr would like that changed. There is no stretch.

Well, either you are wrong about the law, or myself and a whole bunch of my generational and neighborhood cohorts were working illegally at those ages. Which do you think is the case?

 

Child labor laws generally prevent 9-14 year old from working outside of family businesses. Newr would like that changed. There is no stretch.

 

What's this generally about? Are you advocating forced child labor?

Well, either you are wrong about the law, or myself and a whole bunch of my generational and neighborhood cohorts were working illegally at those ages. Which do you think is the case?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labor_l...e_United_States

 

But Gingrich did say laws preventing are "tragically stupid" or something along those lines. and the idea that cutting decent-paying jobs for low-skill workers and replacing them with children is some kind of fix for poverty really is tragically stupid.

What's this generally about? Are you advocating forced child labor?

 

There are exceptions, notably in agriculture. The "generally" was wiggle-room for the myriad of federal and state labor laws.

 

Here's a summary of, for example, Texas' law that forbids employment of anyone under 14 unless specifically exempted. Newt calls this "tragically stupid."

Well, either you are wrong about the law, or myself and a whole bunch of my generational and neighborhood cohorts were working illegally at those ages. Which do you think is the case?

 

The DoL's guide seems to indicate that work for anyone under 14 is heavily restricted. There's always a family business exemption, and paper-route type exemptions.

 

http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/childlbr.htm

So if it's ok in some situations, and Newt is saying there's value in that, he's advocating for child sweat shop labor how? Look, I know you despise anyone with a conservative thought in their brain, but you're taking his statement to the extreme. Unfairly so.

So if it's ok in some situations, and Newt is saying there's value in that, he's advocating for child sweat shop labor how? Look, I know you despise anyone with a conservative thought in their brain, but you're taking his statement to the extreme. Unfairly so.

 

I don't recall saying he's advocating for child sweat shop labor outside of a joke pic response to mr. genius.

 

Newt is saying that there's value in eliminating child labor laws and replacing union workers with children. This is dumb for numerous reasons and deserves to be called so.

I don't recall saying he's advocating for child sweat shop labor outside of a joke pic response to mr. genius.

 

Newt is saying that there's value in eliminating child labor laws and replacing union workers with children. This is dumb for numerous reasons and deserves to be called so.

Not what Newt said. He said the laws as they stand now are bad, which I took to mean, they need changing.

 

Not what Newt said. He said the laws as they stand now are bad, which I took to mean, they need changing.

 

If I grant you that it still doesn't make his idea less bad with respect to protection for children and fighting poverty.

BTW, the unintended consequence of Newt's plan is kids will be competing with adults for those jobs. With unemployment as high as it is, I'm not certain it is a proper step forward. I agree in principle, but probably not now.

BTW, the unintended consequence of Newt's plan is kids will be competing with adults for those jobs.

 

That's not unintended. He explicitly calls for them replacing union janitors. Which breaks the union, drives the adults out of jobs and lowers wages in general. Not sure how firing adults from decent-paying jobs in poor neighborhoods so that their kids could work the same jobs for less pay is some great plan to combat poverty.

That's not unintended. He explicitly calls for them replacing union janitors. Which breaks the union, drives the adults out of jobs and lowers wages in general. Not sure how firing adults from decent-paying jobs in poor neighborhoods so that their kids could work the same jobs for less pay is some great plan to combat poverty.

 

I am not certain that is what he intended to have happen. I believe he was advocating for a "take any job and learn to work for a living" philosophy.