886
submitted 1 year ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] greenmarty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When i read title like this I can't help but wonder, are those kids going to better off without their income though ? My humble guess is that not every family have parents who can support their kids or have access to social care system that can prevent whole family to scrap by to be able to get by.

[-] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

I think the answer is the parents of those kids need to be able to make a living that can support their children. Yes they might be worse off if they lose that income but that misses the bigger issue that children shouldn't need to earn an income to help support their families.

[-] banneryear1868@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

There was a CIA sponsored coup d'etat in Ghana that put the National Liberation Council government in power, they made sure resources in the country could be extracted by private entities at the lowest possible cost.

US foreign policy is based on exploiting resources around the world for private profit at the expense of the local population, hence the fascist coups they've implemented particularly in South America the last half century to ensure these sort of resources aren't nationalized or kept out of the hands of private corporations.

[-] greenmarty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That is obvious yet it doesn't happened but i somehow don't see it would happened by e.g. closing the chocolate factories or something like that.

[-] blujan@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago

As soon as child labor truly disappears, the workers pool is reduced and workers compensation must go up. Child labor only benefits the companies paying less.

[-] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly you don't shuy down chocolate production that's not the evil part, chocolate is delicious and I love it. You shut down the child slavery.

[-] 20hzservers@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I think the answer is the parents of those kids need to be able to make a living that can support their children. Yes they might be worse off if they lose that income but that misses the bigger issue that children shouldn't need to earn an income to help support their families.

this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
886 points (99.2% liked)

World News

39167 readers
1483 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS