NATION

PASSWORD

[Draft] Repeal "Restrictions on Child Labor"

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Woryand
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 25
Founded: Sep 16, 2018
Anarchy

[Draft] Repeal "Restrictions on Child Labor"

Postby Woryand » Tue May 07, 2019 8:51 am

The World Assembly,
Applauding the efforts of GAR #4, a resolution effective in reducing child labor;
Concerned, however, about how this would negatively impact the residents of many nations, particularly those which have a large number of residents living at or barely above a subsistence level of income;
Noting that, in those nations, child labor is a necessary evil due to the alternative being starvation;
Concerned about how section B subsection 7 "[Bans the employment of minors in] work which would preclude the pursuit of a full-time education, such as work for long hours", something that is clearly impossible in many nations if the survival of the child and the child's parents is wanted;
Additionally noting that many nations have education programs that end before the legal age of majority;
Believing that a repeal and replace of this bill is necessary for the aforementioned points;
Hereby Repeals GAR #4 "Restrictions on Child Labor"

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5248
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Tue May 07, 2019 10:55 am

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. This idea about replacing GA #004 is certainly legal, which is good, but I don’t think the arguments you present are convincing. If a nation has lots of children at the poverty line then, without education, they are likely to stay there. Working may be a short-term solution, but can’t lead to long-term economic benefits.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Woryand
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 25
Founded: Sep 16, 2018
Anarchy

Postby Woryand » Tue May 07, 2019 11:47 am

Kenmoria wrote: If a nation has lots of children at the poverty line then, without education, they are likely to stay there. Working may be a short-term solution, but can’t lead to long-term economic benefits.


OOC: The only problem, from what I have found, is that subsistence living quite literally means that everything that you produce is used to keep you alive; a decrease in amounts produced would cause starvation or other similar effects. While this is undesirable, and can lead to an (extreme) poverty trap, this is the sad truth in many nations (most PT ones and I would imagine even a few MT ones).

In addition, even with people in nations who can afford the loss in productivity caused by sending children to school, bills such as GAR #80 don't provide education up to what is the age of majority in most countries.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13825
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Tue May 07, 2019 3:40 pm

Woryand wrote:OOC: The only problem, from what I have found, is that subsistence living quite literally means that everything that you produce is used to keep you alive; a decrease in amounts produced would cause starvation or other similar effects. While this is undesirable, and can lead to an (extreme) poverty trap, this is the sad truth in many nations (most PT ones and I would imagine even a few MT ones).

OOC: Minimum Standards of Living requires that the state see to it that everyone has adequate housing and nutrition, though.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14453
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Tue May 07, 2019 5:23 pm

"A nation that relies on child labor is a nation that needs to refocus it's resources and efforts, not a nation that needs to double-down on their race to the bottom.

"Even if there was no moral argument in favor, permitting child labor enables nations to drop product costs, making it impossible for exporters and producers that do not use child labor to compete and force them to choose between going out of business or themselves utilizing child labor, distracting children from their primary concern: education. As such, your suggested repeal threatens the well-being of our economy and other global economies.

"Opposed."

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
Authority on All Existence,
Globalist Dog,
Dark Psychic Vampire, and
Chief Populist Elitist!


User avatar
Woryand
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 25
Founded: Sep 16, 2018
Anarchy

Postby Woryand » Thu May 09, 2019 9:11 am

OOC: Sorry for the delay in replying to all of this.

Araraukar wrote:
Woryand wrote:OOC: The only problem, from what I have found, is that subsistence living quite literally means that everything that you produce is used to keep you alive; a decrease in amounts produced would cause starvation or other similar effects. While this is undesirable, and can lead to an (extreme) poverty trap, this is the sad truth in many nations (most PT ones and I would imagine even a few MT ones).

OOC: Minimum Standards of Living requires that the state see to it that everyone has adequate housing and nutrition, though.


"It seems as if Minimum Standards of Living makes an exception to this if the nation is going through an economic crisis or if there are otherwise not sufficient resources to give everyone the provisions outlined in said resolution (or the wealth redistribution required would push the total resources to below the amount required for everyone to have the provisions outlined)."

Separatist Peoples wrote:"A nation that relies on child labor is a nation that needs to refocus it's resources and efforts, not a nation that needs to double-down on their race to the bottom.

"Even if there was no moral argument in favor, permitting child labor enables nations to drop product costs, making it impossible for exporters and producers that do not use child labor to compete and force them to choose between going out of business or themselves utilizing child labor, distracting children from their primary concern: education. As such, your suggested repeal threatens the well-being of our economy and other global economies.

"Opposed."


"It is acknowledged that child labor allows product costs to be dropped, harming the production of some items in nations that do not utilize child labor. However, given that the replacement resolution only seeks to permit exceptions in agriculture and a very limited subset of non-agricultural jobs, we believe that this should be a non-issue."

OOC: Fedele proposed this added preamble: "Recognizing that children serve important roles in industry with their ability to fit into tight spaces". What would people think of this?

User avatar
Sierra Lyricalia
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3390
Founded: Nov 29, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Sierra Lyricalia » Thu May 09, 2019 10:13 am

OOC: ...I would say that sounds like you want to send Welsh eight year olds back down into the coal mines. This one is going to be a long, hard slog for you.
Principal-Agent, Anarchy; Squadron Admiral, The Red Fleet
Stephanie Athena Zakalwe
Author: 354 GA / Issues 436, 451, 724
S.L. Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tech Level: Complicated (or not: 7/0/6 i.e. 12) / RP Details
Leonid Berkman Pavonis,
Ideological Deviant, MT Army stooge, & "red [who] do[es]n't read" (various)
Ambassador-At-Large
Illustrious Bum #279



User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5248
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Thu May 09, 2019 10:22 am

Woryand wrote:OOC: Fedele proposed this added preamble: "Recognizing that children serve important roles in industry with their ability to fit into tight spaces". What would people think of this?

(OOC: One of the worst forms of child labour, excluding outright slavery, is that which relies on their small stature. Any space that only a minor can fit into is, fairly obviously, going to be very small, which is not good psychologically or for respiratory purposes. You would be better mentioning the small hands or agility of children, and even then that sounds exploitative.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13825
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Thu May 09, 2019 5:51 pm

OOC: Given that most people who will be voting on this are in RL from first world nations, any "children have small hands and can get into tight spots" thing is going to be countered with "but we have robots that can do all that now". There's just no way to justify forbidding children a better future (by denying them time for having an education) that you can spin that won't sound horribly exploitative. If you worry about undeveloped nations or nations suffering some times of calamity, I'd like to point out that there are at least three resolutions out there that require the WA as a whole and individual WA nations separately to aid such nations.

You cannot justify this.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Sierra Lyricalia
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3390
Founded: Nov 29, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Sierra Lyricalia » Thu May 09, 2019 6:13 pm

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Given that most people who will be voting on this are in RL from first world nations, any "children have small hands and can get into tight spots" thing is going to be countered with "but we have robots that can do all that now". There's just no way to justify forbidding children a better future (by denying them time for having an education) that you can spin that won't sound horribly exploitative. If you worry about undeveloped nations or nations suffering some times of calamity, I'd like to point out that there are at least three resolutions out there that require the WA as a whole and individual WA nations separately to aid such nations.

You cannot justify this.

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:OOC: ...I would say that sounds like you want to send Welsh eight year olds back down into the coal mines. This one is going to be a long, hard slog for you.


Sorry, did I say 8-year-olds, dude? I meant six. And it doesn't take the development of robots for a nation to realize child labor is unjustifiable - keeping your future workforce from becoming educated dooms your country to an eternity of subsistence and degradation.


"Ambassador, no point that you've made here overrides the simple truth that allowing children to work full time and in hazardous occupations is not only ethically abhorrent, but also practically idiotic. If you don't send your children to school, they don't learn extremely basic skills and knowledge necessary to do the kind of work that can lift them and your country out of poverty. If a nation can be compared to a singular organism, child labor is that organism eating itself for sustenance. You're advocating auto-cannibalism of the body politic, ambassador. If the moral argument doesn't convince you, simple thermodynamics should."
Principal-Agent, Anarchy; Squadron Admiral, The Red Fleet
Stephanie Athena Zakalwe
Author: 354 GA / Issues 436, 451, 724
S.L. Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tech Level: Complicated (or not: 7/0/6 i.e. 12) / RP Details
Leonid Berkman Pavonis,
Ideological Deviant, MT Army stooge, & "red [who] do[es]n't read" (various)
Ambassador-At-Large
Illustrious Bum #279



User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8960
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Thu May 09, 2019 8:31 pm

I'll inject a passage from my development economics textbook to this discussion, especially since it's quite relevant. Naturally, because economists view the world in terms of trade-offs, it'll probably make everyone mad. Horseshoe theory at its finest. I typed this really fast, my apologies for any errors. But first, a shorter explanation of why child labour exists in relatively broad and general terms (caveating, as is especially relevant in the GA, the non-existence of slavery). It doesn't exist because people are evil and assign labour to children. It doesn't exist because their parents are evil. It exists because households attempting to meet budget constraints in extremely low productivity labour market environments have to leverage their only advantage to survive: their labour. Returning to the passage.

Working conditions are often horrendous; the ILO resorts that some of its surveys show that more than half of child labourers toil for none or more hours [*392]per day. The worst forms of child labour endanger health or well-being, involving hazards, sexual exploitation, trafficking, and debt bondage. In a 2011 publication, the ILO reported that every year, about 22,000 children die as a result of work-related accidents. Clearly, child labour is not an isolated problem but a widespread one...

Nevertheless, it is not obvious that an immediate ban on all forms of child labour is always in the best interests of the child. Without work, a child may become severely malnourished; with work, school fees as well as basic nutrition and health care may be available. But there is a set of circumstances under which both the child labourer and the whole may be unambiguously better off with a ban on child labour: multiple equilibria. Kaushik Basu ahas provided such an analysis and we shall first consider his simple model which shows how this problem may arise.

To model child labour, we make two important assumptions: First, a household with a sufficiently high income would not send its children to work. As one might hope, there is strong evidence that this is true, at least most of the time. Second, child and adult labour are substitutes. In fact, children are not as productive as adults, and adults can do any work that children can do. This assertion is not an assumption; it is a finding of many studies of the productivity of child labourers in many countries. It is is important to emphasise this, because one rationalisation for child labour often heard is that children have special productive abilities, such as small fingers, that make them important for the production of rugs and other products. However, there is no support for this view. In essentially every task that has been studied, including carpet weaving, adult labourers are significantly more productive.

For Kaushik Basu's model, refer Kaushik Basu, Child labour: cause, consequence, and cure, with remarks on international labour standards, 37 J Economic Literature 1101 (1999). At a more broad level, the generally accepted means to solve the issue – which is that all families would be better off if children did not work, since it would depress the labour supply amongst especially low-productivity workers, raising their wages – is to create a conditional cash transfer programme which would give people money and in-kind transfers (e.g. school meals and healthcare) for sending their children to school. This is a response to the fact that for many families, the opportunity cost of sending their children to school, with the direct costs, is too large for them to bear. Lowering that cost is therefore imperative for long-term human capital development policy.

There is some debate over whether unconditional cash transfers to basically all poor people in these areas is as or more effective than conditional cash transfers. Empirical evidence from randomised controlled trials shows that UCT is more effective at long term improvements which reduce the likelihood of teenage pregnancies and marriages. The cost of those UCTs as well is not large relative to those in more conditional cash transfer programmes, with something on the order of 4 dollars per month to parents and 1 dollar per to school-age children. See Sarah Baird et al., Cash or condition? Evidence form a cash transfer experiment, 126 Quarterly J Economics 1709 (2011).
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Thu May 09, 2019 8:44 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18652
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Bears Armed » Fri May 10, 2019 5:54 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:the ILO resorts that some of its surveys show that more than half of child labourers toil for none or more hours [*392]per day.

OOC
presumably "nine" rather than "none"?
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8960
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Fri May 10, 2019 9:10 am

Yea. As warned, lol, there are typos.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Dastardly villain providing free services to the community sans remuneration

User avatar
Asrtotzka
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Asrtotzka » Sun May 12, 2019 10:31 am

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Dear comrades,

This ambassador assists stupefied to the discussion of this draft. I hope my words will be understood in the good way and will help to find a great solution.

First of all, childhood is defined in a certain range of years because of the necessary development of the human being before his body is ready to face any kind of effort and his mind reaches a specific level of madurity.

In second place, assuming you find a work a child can perform without damage or comsequences for his physical or phsychic health, we have to agree that if you give children the possibility to work you will have to increase dramatically the offer of workforce, which in an scenario of stable number of jobs, will sink salaries and even force mid-age people to retirement. This effect shows us two serious comsequences:

On one hand, you will lower salaries, so maybe you will give children a salary, but the whole wealth of workers will impoverish due to an aggregate reduction of income.

And, on the other hand, you will not erradicate poverty - you will only displace it to an elder segment of population, exactly a segment that cannot study as efficiently as younger people.

And, in final place, this repeal will finally not only affect the nations that implement child labor, but will also affects neighbours because of the effects of poverty, a possible call effect and, even, insecurity issues due to mafias or similar organizations that could submit children to a kind of slavery.

From our sincerelly experience, we think child poverty will never be solved with child labor, but with social policy. Forget maket law and take advantage of the power of the State to implement actual and feasible solutions that do not ruin children future.

Thank you very much and glory to Asrtotzka!


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arkhane, Bluelight-R006, MSN [Bot], The New California Republic, Tyrannyicalist

Advertisement

Remove ads