Poor children should mop floors

[Limehouse]

A few nights ago, I was watching a TV programme about poverty in America. The programme described how some people, previously in work, have lost jobs and fallen into terrible poverty. One guy could find only casual labour and could not afford to pay health insurance. His life was at risk because he could not pay for urgent sugery on a hernia.

Then I heard Newt Gringrich claiming that children of the poor have no work ethic and they should be put to owrk claening toilets and mopping floors. He wants to see a return to child labour. Of course, bringing back child labour will really help adults back into work, won't it? And paying child labour rates will just make those big fat companies a whole lot richer!

Americans must be really proud of this guy!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2069134/GOP-frontrunner-Newt-Gingrich-poor-children-habits-working--unless-illegal.html

[kensei]

I am an American and I thank God that Gingrich is currently running in last place. Darth Vader would be a better president.

[Limehouse]

I am an American and I thank God that Gingrich is currently running in last place. Darth Vader would be a better president.

That's very reassuring, Kensei. I was horrified by some of the comments made by some Republicans about the plight of poor people in America, some of whom have been reduced to living in storm drains because they have lost their jobs and homes.

I realise, of course, that the programme could have been biased but seeing the condition of once thriving neighbourhoods in cities such as Detroit it is obvious to me that some people are suffering terribly and my heart goes out to them.

I want to know what I can do?

[Robert]

Limehouse, not being funny, but if you want to help, why not send them some dosh?

[Limehouse]

the democratic

Limehouse, not being funny, but if you want to help, why not send them some dosh?

Yes, I could do that and would be quite willing to. However, much more is needed. People need jobs, people need decent homes to live in and children need nourishment if they are to thrive.

How is it, that in the richest country in the world, children go to bed hungry and a man can die for want of medical care? How is it that in a country that prides itself on freedom of speech and democracy, some people earn so little, they cannot afford basic health care?

Please, if I am being unfair or I am ignorant of the truth, someone put me right.

[Adam Went]

The issue is that many people are willing to help out the poor where they can, but because of the economic climate these days one has to be very careful with their own purse strings, lest they find themselves amongst the people that they were, a short time ago, trying to help.

Personally i'm not against reformed labour laws, stopping short of child labour and the like of course - it worked well enough for centuries worth of our ancestors, most of the problems have only come about in the last 50 years or so when everybody's become increasingly touchy-touchy about....well, everything, really.

Cheers,
Adam.

[jason_c]

The issue is that many people are willing to help out the poor where they can, but because of the economic climate these days one has to be very careful with their own purse strings, lest they find themselves amongst the people that they were, a short time ago, trying to help.

Personally i'm not against reformed labour laws, stopping short of child labour and the like of course - it worked well enough for centuries worth of our ancestors, most of the problems have only come about in the last 50 years or so when everybody's become increasingly touchy-touchy about....well, everything, really.

Cheers,
Adam.

I agree with much of this. I'd also point out that many children do work in the United States. Delivering newspapers and mowing lawns seems to be ok but somehow mopping floors is not.

[Limehouse]

I agree with much of this. I'd also point out that many children do work in the United States. Delivering newspapers and mowing lawns seems to be ok but somehow mopping floors is not.

Of course many children work - to earn pocket money. We've all done it. However, this guy thinks it's a good idea for children not currently permitted to work because of their age, to be employed in mopping floors and cleaning toilets to help their parents out of poverty. I like it that his aspirations for these kids is so high. Also, it doesn't seem to have dawned on him that if kids are being employed at kiddie rates, it's not really going to create much employment for their parents. I'd like to see this guy's kids and grandkids mopping floors and being paid a few cents an hour.

[Limehouse]

The issue is that many people are willing to help out the poor where they can, but because of the economic climate these days one has to be very careful with their own purse strings, lest they find themselves amongst the people that they were, a short time ago, trying to help.

Personally i'm not against reformed labour laws, stopping short of child labour and the like of course - it worked well enough for centuries worth of our ancestors, most of the problems have only come about in the last 50 years or so when everybody's become increasingly touchy-touchy about....well, everything, really.

Cheers,
Adam.

The point is, a lot of the wealth in this country and in America was created by the exploitation of children, slaves, convicts and poor casual labourers. What would you reform?

Having said that, I do believe that everyone who can work, should be actively looking for work and I would also require people to undergo retraining (where possible) in order to gain employment. However, I do not believe it is fair to punish the poor for the economic mess caused by poor economic management.

[Abby Normal]

the democratic

Yes, I could do that and would be quite willing to. However, much more is needed. People need jobs, people need decent homes to live in and children need nourishment if they are to thrive.

How is it, that in the richest country in the world, children go to bed hungry and a man can die for want of medical care? How is it that in a country that prides itself on freedom of speech and democracy, some people earn so little, they cannot afford basic health care?

Please, if I am being unfair or I am ignorant of the truth, someone put me right.

two words

Government Waste

[RonIpstone]

As American military and economic might has kept the free world free since the cessation of hostilities in 1945, I do not think it is meet and proper for people in this country to criticise the USA as to how it spends its wealth. That we in the UK choose to fritter our money away on overpaid health workers in an inefficient and inappropriately named National Health Service is our look out. Our American cousins are entitled to point the finger at us and make the accusation that we do not contribute fully to the task of policing this dangerous world in which we live because of our extravagance in spending on the NHS, the post-office, the railways and the communist infiltrated BBC.

And you know what? I would not blame them if they did!

[Adam Went]

Jason:

Most businesses who employ youths do so at a discounted rate. This is OK to some extent but what 14 or 15 year old is going to want to work, say, a retail job, where you're constantly in a pressure situation and dealing with regularly difficult customers, for $7 or $8 an hour, making maybe $100 a week if they're really lucky, when they can be spending time with their friends and what not?

Trust me, i've been there. I worked for two years in a retail store, full time, for $8-9 an hour, when I was a teenager. In hindsight now I consider it an incredible waste of two years which could have been so much more productive in other ways such as further education, and that should be the priority for children......BUT having said that, the point is that things would be greatly improved if these juniors were given a few dollars more per hour by those they work for. Not least because it's the juniors that usually end up being dumped with the crappiest jobs.

Limehouse:

Very young children were put to work by their parents back in the Victorian era and beyond, when money was needed. They knew no different, so it wasn't a problem. Now, children are brought up differently, and not necessarily a good differently.

I would reform a lot, if it was left to me. I despise huge corporate companies and am with the small businesses all the way. Juniors would be payed more and given more incentives to enter the workforce earlier, even if only on a casual basis while they continue their studies, and huge corporate businesses would be forced to limit their opening hours so that smaller businesses are capable of competing, and everybody in general is on a far more level playing field.....ah yes, if only it was as it was a few decades ago.

Still, my rant aside, the nail has been hit on the head on this thread already by just two words: Economy, and Government.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Magpie]

If Newt happens to win, how soon before I can I expect to receive my child labourer? Can I request one tall enough to clean my kitchen cabinets too? Preferably a mute, so it doesn't distract me when I'm trying to write.

[Limehouse]

Jason:

Most businesses who employ youths do so at a discounted rate. This is OK to some extent but what 14 or 15 year old is going to want to work, say, a retail job, where you're constantly in a pressure situation and dealing with regularly difficult customers, for $7 or $8 an hour, making maybe $100 a week if they're really lucky, when they can be spending time with their friends and what not?

Trust me, i've been there. I worked for two years in a retail store, full time, for $8-9 an hour, when I was a teenager. In hindsight now I consider it an incredible waste of two years which could have been so much more productive in other ways such as further education, and that should be the priority for children......BUT having said that, the point is that things would be greatly improved if these juniors were given a few dollars more per hour by those they work for. Not least because it's the juniors that usually end up being dumped with the crappiest jobs.

Limehouse:

Very young children were put to work by their parents back in the Victorian era and beyond, when money was needed. They knew no different, so it wasn't a problem. Now, children are brought up differently, and not necessarily a good differently.

I would reform a lot, if it was left to me. I despise huge corporate companies and am with the small businesses all the way. Juniors would be payed more and given more incentives to enter the workforce earlier, even if only on a casual basis while they continue their studies, and huge corporate businesses would be forced to limit their opening hours so that smaller businesses are capable of competing, and everybody in general is on a far more level playing field.....ah yes, if only it was as it was a few decades ago.

Still, my rant aside, the nail has been hit on the head on this thread already by just two words: Economy, and Government.

Cheers,
Adam.

Hello Adam,

It is sad that small children were put to work and that, in a wealthy country, there were so few personal wealth-making opportunities for a great many people whose labour created a great deal of the wealth.

I like your ideas for reform.

Julie

[Limehouse]

As American military and economic might has kept the free world free since the cessation of hostilities in 1945, I do not think it is meet and proper for people in this country to criticise the USA as to how it spends its wealth. That we in the UK choose to fritter our money away on overpaid health workers in an inefficient and inappropriately named National Health Service is our look out. Our American cousins are entitled to point the finger at us and make the accusation that we do not contribute fully to the task of policing this dangerous world in which we live because of our extravagance in spending on the NHS, the post-office, the railways and the communist infiltrated BBC.

And you know what? I would not blame them if they did!

Hello Ron,

It's a long time since we heard from you.

Firstly, from comments of many Americans interviewed on the programme to which I referred, it is clear that many of them are concerned about the growing number of people in America who have been uprooted by the loss of their jobs and who have tried to find work in other towns/cities/states and who cannot find regular paid work. It is not a matter of criticising the USA on how it spends it's wealth. I am not asking anyone in America to spend money providing free health care to the poor. What I do think is wrong is that low wages and unemployment have driven people out of healthcare schemes. As a human who cares about others, I think it is wrong for any nation to stand by and allow a man to die because he cannot afford sugery.

Your comments about the UK's over-paid health workers and the UK 'frittering away money' on the things you list do not take account of the fact that we all pay taxes for these things. I notice you do not mention the billions spent on nationalising banks brought to their knees by irresponsible gambling on high-risk stock market tomfoolery - the real cause of the current recession.

As for your assertion that America has kept the free world free since 1945, well, that really depends on what you mean by 'free' and there are just so many exceptions to the assertion that they would take us away from the topic of this thread.

I have no wish to insult or offend Americans. I was shocked by a Tv programme that revealed the poverty experienced by a large number of people for whom I have compassion and concern. If that is wrong, I am happy to be in error.