this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
180 points (98.9% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7120 readers
637 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As a libertarian, I honestly don't know where you're getting that. Libertarianism is firmly rooted in consent, and minors cannot consent, so libertarians should be opposed here.
Hahahaha
I found this instance of the New Hampshire Libertarian Party calling for ending child labor laws, and in that article, we find this quote from former Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Gary Johnson:
There's also this Mises article, which argues that kids used to be able to work (largely with their parents), and thus should be able to work. Current labor laws, if I'm not mistaken, are something like this:
That's reasonable. I would take this a step further and allow employment of 12-16yos with parental approval and adult supervision by specifically named adults the parents are aware of, and notice should be sent to the school body and local relevant agency of such employment. Employment should be limited to work a child could reasonably do safely (e.g. sweeping, lawn mowing, etc), and hours would be limited as well (max 4 hours at a time without parent present, break every hour).
Here's a larger article from Libertarian publication Reason about the incident, as well as the larger issue of the Mises caucus. The Mises caucus has since taken control of the national Libertarian Party, but I don't believe that should be construed to mean libertarians in general support things like the NHLP policy on child labor, it just means libertarians are frustrated with the lack of results and want to try something different.
At the very least, this should demonstrate that this isn't a policy libertarians are united on. There's a lot of nuance here, and the backlash over the relatively tame policy position of the NHLP shows that a large chunk of libertarians are unwilling to even go down that path.
No, children do not need to do labor to live. The goal here is to teach kids through work experience, meaning time management (juggle work, school, and play) and managing money.
Here's my personal experience:
More than half of that money went to my school fund, and is a large part of why I didn't need student loans for college. I also used it to buy things my parents wouldn't get me, such as a gaming console.
If we allow kids under 18 to work (and we should, with lots of limits and safeguards), it should have some clear restrictions:
That should prevent most of the abuse since parents wouldn't get any benefit from the labor. The only goal should be for the child's benefit, not to somehow benefit the parents.
The NHLP went too far, and were rightly called out for it.
Why 21?
And yes, I agree student debt shouldn't be a thing, but the solution imo isn't to make education free, but to make student loans dischargable in bankruptcy.
Why not? It teaches them the value of labor, which is extremely useful in transitioning to adult life. I learned the value of hard work, and that has helped me immensely in my life. I don't want to get into debt because I want my labor to mean more than a line item on a bank's financial books. I understand the value of investing, because I want my money to work for me.
I had access to other video games as a kid, but I wanted something specific and the condition was I had to earn it. I also wanted to drive a car, but I was responsible to pay for gas and thus needed a job. My parents paid my tuition, but I was reasonable to pay for my room and board. I wanted a cell phone, so I bought one with the money I earned. I got a credit card at 18 (parents co-signed) and a second in school, and never once paid interest and had a great credit score so I could buy a house earlier (bought at 25?). I got married before finishing school, at which point I took complete responsibility for paying my way through school.
I worked my way through college, and I think that made me actually value that educational experience. I had a vested interest to get something out of it, and I was set up to succeed when I landed my own job because I already knew how to manage my finances. I learned to live frugally and not waste my money on nonsense, because I understood the work to get that money.
So I absolutely will be providing my kids work experience, whether on the books or not (we have an allowance system at home based on chores). I think it's more valuable to work outside the family, just because there's that added level of accountability (Mom and Dad probably won't fire you, but that other boss would). I've heard horror stories of parents stealing their kids' money, so that's where my focus is in terms of legislation.
You do realize you can do both, no? Here's what I did:
When I was working as a teen, my parents pushed me to save half of my money, and I was probably closer to 75% (after donating to my church). Here's my rough income history as a teen:
I tracked my own hours and reported them to get paid. In fact, I taught myself to write in PHP to automate tracking my hours (built a crappy web app), and I took a Java class and taught myself C# to get that $8/hr job. All of that was done on my own, my parents didn't push me at all, they just saw my hobbies and hooked me up with a family friend.
From 16-18, I was at the local college, which meant harder classes, but fewer classes, so I only had ~3 hours of class time each day. I studied hard, so I usually got my homework finished before my friends got done with school. In the fall, I would play Varsity tennis at the high school, and work just before (I would do homework in the evening those days).
By the time I went to college, I had a few thousand saved, which was enough to get me through my first year of college without working. From my second year on, I had:
My wife worked waiting tables until our first kid, which also helped. After a few years, we had saved enough for a down payment on a house (~$50k), and I had impeccable credit history (about 7 years of on-time payments).
The only help I got from my parents was:
If I didn't work as a kid, I wouldn't have developed marketable skills, work ethic, or budgeting skills. So I'm going to be doing that for my kids if possible.
Your ideology is trash, and nobody over the age of 23 takes you seriously and they never will.
Including your family. They hate you.
Even sadder that you don't even seem to understand your own political ideology. How do you think child labor stops? You think the free market magically fixes it? Because I assure you that libertarians do not want regulations mandating that corporations cannot hire children. If you think that's what libertarians believe, then I don't know what to fucking tell you.