in florida, california, texas and quite a few other states you can get your learners at 15 and license at 16 (can't drive between 11 pm and 5 am without a waiver). teen drivers kill over 4k people a year.
Labor Dept to let teens work longer hours in hazardous jobs: report
- Thread starter 88m3
- Start date
TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?
I walk around a little edgy already
You missed the point.
Let me try this again, if America is in a place where parents need to sign away their kids well being and rights in order to make ends meet the country has failed it's citizens.
Jokes.This country failed its citizens a long time ago and continues to... that’s not even up for debate.
Sounds like you want to prevent youths that want to participate in apprenticeships and build their human capital from being able to... in order to protect those who might “need to” in order to “make ends meet”.
How does preventing them from making “ends meet” help them?
and do you have receipts that this is even the case?
In my experience both middle class and well off parents push for their children to work, especially if college appears to not be in the cards.
I’ve not heard of this epidemic of kids being hurt by this practice. Can some one link me to the stats on injuries that have statist so spooked?
If this is part of a larger college or nothing push by Dems then
my bad. You gotta push your agenda like everyone else.
I’ve not heard of this epidemic of kids being hurt by this practice. Can some one link me to the stats on injuries that have statist so spooked?
If this is part of a larger college or nothing push by Dems then
my bad. You gotta push your agenda like everyone else.
You're being dramatic
You're being dismissive.
If blue text is dapping you you're likely wrong.
The kids can already do one hour a day as an apprentice.
This country failed its citizens a long time ago and continues to... that’s not even up for debate.
Sounds like you want to prevent youths that want to participate in apprenticeships and build their human capital from being able to... in order to protect those who might “need to” in order to “make ends meet”.
How does preventing them from making “ends meet” help them?
and do you have receipts that this is even the case?
Why would this need to be uncapped for any reason other than access to cheap labor?
Please read before blue texting.
Blue text:
A 16 year old is too young to vote. Liberals are encouraging this to increase their base.
Also blue text:
We should encourage 16 year olds to chose hazardous jobs because they are responsible enough to decide their future.
A 16 year old is too young to vote. Liberals are encouraging this to increase their base.
Also blue text:
We should encourage 16 year olds to chose hazardous jobs because they are responsible enough to decide their future.
Link to these casualty/injury statistics yet?
Or are we just calling these jobs hazardous to further limit economic mobility and push increased redistribution?
Or are we just calling these jobs hazardous to further limit economic mobility and push increased redistribution?
Parents play no role in your world view?
The skills/work experience will translate into better economic outcomes for those who participate... taking this away because the employer teaching them the trade isn’t paying them what you consider a “fair/living” wage is short sighted.
The parents aren't at work with them. We aren't talking about parents training their children at home.
You're arguing a point that isn't up for debate. There is already a program in place that offers supervised on the job training in these fields they're just capped.
The argument being made isn't that these apprenticeships shouldn't exists. The argument being made is how much time we should allow minors to perform hazardous supervised work.
So the crux of the argument is this?
Is 7 hours a week is adequate for skillet development for minors?
If not, what safeguards are you going to put in place to make sure there is enough supervision in place. Anyone in work, that deals with workforce development and training knows there's only so much time you can afford to take your resources away from their primary role.
But this isn't about skills development and future work. It's about putting them to work now. Like. I said. Please read.
They want to solve the problem of low wages by having more people work.
Isn’t the idea of apprenticeship to move into high paying careers down the road?
Explain this solve low wages point please...