Childish playground taunts such as "Buttboys for the Bosses"?
You're really not the sharpest marshmallow in the bag, now are you?
Capitalism cannot fail citizens
- Thread starter Truth Detector
- Start date
Childish playground taunts such as "Buttboys for the Bosses"?
You're really not the sharpest marshmallow in the bag, now are you?
You did a LOT of very heavy drugs as a pre-teen, didn't you?
How about a few example of "unchecked " capitalism? And be specific. You fake ass cripple on public assistance.
Jaysus, he just proved my point and he doesn’t even know it, too funny
Tell us pal, what does “capitalism cannot fail citizens” mean, duh
Child Labor, it took the government stepping in, socialism, to end it
Is that so, faggot? Is your mom finding it difficult to satisfy your appetite these days? Our form of governance is hardly unchecked, Triggered Lizard.
You do know the difference bewteen a system of governance and an economic framework, don't you? Well, maybe not.
Poor Anchovies.
No. Child labor laws are not "socialism." They are regulatory measures that limit or prohibit the employment of children (typically under 14–16 in non-hazardous work, with stricter rules for hazardous occupations), primarily to protect health, safety, education, and development. Their existence is related to debates about capitalism because industrialization under market systems sharply increased visible, often harsh forms of child wage labor in factories, mines, and mills—prompting reform efforts—but the laws themselves are not socialist in origin, nature, or effect.
Child labor long predated industrial capitalism. It was widespread in agriculture, households, and pre-industrial economies as a necessity of low productivity and poverty. The Industrial Revolution concentrated it in factories (often with long hours, dangerous conditions, and low pay), making the problem more visible and politically salient in Britain, Europe, and the US. Early restrictions appeared in the 1830s–1840s (e.g., Prussian rules, British Factory Acts limiting ages/hours in textiles, Massachusetts state laws). Nearly all of Europe had some form by the 1890s. In the US, states acted first; federal efforts (Keating-Owen 1916) were struck down by the Supreme Court, a proposed Child Labor Amendment in 1924 failed ratification amid opposition, and lasting federal rules came with the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (minimum ages, hour limits, hazardous-occupation bans, with agriculture exemptions that persist).
Reformers included progressives, religious groups, women’s clubs, teachers, public-health advocates, and labor unions (who often saw children as undercutting adult wages). Socialists and social democrats frequently supported the laws as part of broader worker protections, and some opponents (business groups, National Association of Manufacturers) explicitly red-baited them as “socialistic,” “communistic,” or “bolshevist” in the 1920s—tying them to equality assumptions or Communist International positions they rejected. That was rhetorical framing, not accurate taxonomy. Similar protections exist across mixed-market democracies, social democracies, and other systems; pure socialist experiments also regulated (or ideologically reframed) child work, but the core US/European statutes arose from pragmatic responses to industrialization, not collective ownership of the means of production.
Economic historians note that rising productivity and family incomes under industrial growth made child labor less necessary well before (or alongside) the strongest laws; legislation often codified trends already underway rather than solely causing them. Pre-capitalist and non-capitalist societies had extensive child work; sustained large-scale reduction correlated with rising living standards that let parents keep kids in school.
The linked Just Plain Politics thread (“Capitalism cannot fail citizens”) is a standard pro-market argument: capitalism as a system of voluntary exchange and opportunity doesn’t “fail” people; individual choices and socialist alternatives do. Child-labor claims sometimes surface in these debates as a critique of unregulated markets (exploitation under early industrial capitalism) or as a counter that regulations prove the need for state intervention. Calling the resulting laws “socialism” conflates ordinary police-power regulation (hours, safety, age floors—like fire codes or pure-food laws) with socialism’s core features (public/collective ownership or direction of production). Most liberal market economies maintain such rules without becoming socialist; opponents of the laws have long used the “socialist” label as a smear, just as supporters sometimes overstate them as pure triumphs over capitalism.
In short: the laws responded to real problems amplified by industrial capitalism, were backed by a broad coalition that included socialists, and were attacked as socialist by some defenders of the status quo. They are conventional regulatory limits on contracts involving minors, not an inherently socialist institution. Prosperity reduced the economic pressure for child labor far more than statutes alone; the statutes then locked in protections once societies could afford them.
grok.com
No. Child labor laws are not "socialism." They are regulatory measures that limit or prohibit the employment of children (typically under 14–16 in non-hazardous work, with stricter rules for hazardous occupations), primarily to protect health, safety, education, and development. Their existence is related to debates about capitalism because industrialization under market systems sharply increased visible, often harsh forms of child wage labor in factories, mines, and mills—prompting reform efforts—but the laws themselves are not socialist in origin, nature, or effect.
Historical context
Child labor long predated industrial capitalism. It was widespread in agriculture, households, and pre-industrial economies as a necessity of low productivity and poverty. The Industrial Revolution concentrated it in factories (often with long hours, dangerous conditions, and low pay), making the problem more visible and politically salient in Britain, Europe, and the US. Early restrictions appeared in the 1830s–1840s (e.g., Prussian rules, British Factory Acts limiting ages/hours in textiles, Massachusetts state laws). Nearly all of Europe had some form by the 1890s. In the US, states acted first; federal efforts (Keating-Owen 1916) were struck down by the Supreme Court, a proposed Child Labor Amendment in 1924 failed ratification amid opposition, and lasting federal rules came with the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (minimum ages, hour limits, hazardous-occupation bans, with agriculture exemptions that persist).
Reformers included progressives, religious groups, women’s clubs, teachers, public-health advocates, and labor unions (who often saw children as undercutting adult wages). Socialists and social democrats frequently supported the laws as part of broader worker protections, and some opponents (business groups, National Association of Manufacturers) explicitly red-baited them as “socialistic,” “communistic,” or “bolshevist” in the 1920s—tying them to equality assumptions or Communist International positions they rejected. That was rhetorical framing, not accurate taxonomy. Similar protections exist across mixed-market democracies, social democracies, and other systems; pure socialist experiments also regulated (or ideologically reframed) child work, but the core US/European statutes arose from pragmatic responses to industrialization, not collective ownership of the means of production.
Economic historians note that rising productivity and family incomes under industrial growth made child labor less necessary well before (or alongside) the strongest laws; legislation often codified trends already underway rather than solely causing them. Pre-capitalist and non-capitalist societies had extensive child work; sustained large-scale reduction correlated with rising living standards that let parents keep kids in school.
Relation to the capitalism thread
The linked Just Plain Politics thread (“Capitalism cannot fail citizens”) is a standard pro-market argument: capitalism as a system of voluntary exchange and opportunity doesn’t “fail” people; individual choices and socialist alternatives do. Child-labor claims sometimes surface in these debates as a critique of unregulated markets (exploitation under early industrial capitalism) or as a counter that regulations prove the need for state intervention. Calling the resulting laws “socialism” conflates ordinary police-power regulation (hours, safety, age floors—like fire codes or pure-food laws) with socialism’s core features (public/collective ownership or direction of production). Most liberal market economies maintain such rules without becoming socialist; opponents of the laws have long used the “socialist” label as a smear, just as supporters sometimes overstate them as pure triumphs over capitalism.
In short: the laws responded to real problems amplified by industrial capitalism, were backed by a broad coalition that included socialists, and were attacked as socialist by some defenders of the status quo. They are conventional regulatory limits on contracts involving minors, not an inherently socialist institution. Prosperity reduced the economic pressure for child labor far more than statutes alone; the statutes then locked in protections once societies could afford them.
Child Labor Laws Not Socialism | Shared Grok Conversation
Grok, are child labor laws "socialism" as Anchovies avers, and is their existence related to a threa
grok.com
Jack Grealish
Verified User
根本没什么童工。那些小孩要么在上辅导班，要么玩手机。什么童工？根本没有。
你但凡在中国生活过几个星期，你都不可能会去相信这里有什么童工。
你但凡在中国生活过几个星期，你都不可能会去相信这里有什么童工。
Jack Grealish
Verified User
另外为什么要说朝鲜有童工？朝鲜的事你说得明白吗？我一个中国人我都不知道朝鲜现在什么情况，你美国人能知道朝鲜有童工？你在开玩笑吗？
Your point is that you're a rambling fool posting idiocy that is the opposite of reality?
I agree, I proved that point.
Read the OP - he makes his point.
My point is your lie that "Capitalism will put all children in sweatshops" is stupid.
Because you are ignorant, uneducated, and dishonest. You don't even grasp the reality of the child labor that was common in London and Berlin - highly rare in America.
Children who were literally starving stood in lines for days begging for jobs, as a means of survival as the feudal (socialist) order failed them and left them for dead. The lie that feudal-socialism was free of child labor is just so very absurd. Children who flocked to factories wee refugees from the collectivist farms that were being erased by modern life.
But sure, go ahead and lie some more with your Bolshevik fables. Lying is the heart of the left. No one would follow your party if they were aware of the facts and not corruptly running the scam.
Remember, "socialism" is simply "feudalism" repackaged to sell to the abysmally stupid.
The democrat dream for America;
evince
Truthmatters
Unfettered capitalism eats its self you dumb fuck
Read some history you child brained loser
evince
Truthmatters
Dear fucking idiot
Unfettered capitalism allows for child labor
That’s why America decided decades ago to create child labor laws to FETTER capitalism
You idiots never think anything through all the way
Yes that makes you idiots who can’t run anything without destroying it
Yes you made a fucking fool of your self in this thread
Fuck you very much
evince
Truthmatters
Capitalism is a tool
It is not a political system that runs on automatic to create a more perfect union
Only the oligarchs sheep believe it’s the end all be all
Even the Oligarchs believe what I’m saying here
You are the tools of evil if you back the lies the Oligarchs feed you
Child brained tools of evil
I am a true capitalist
I know capitalism is merely a tool
I know how to use that tool
I’ve read enough history to see how to use it as a tool to benefit mankind
You Fetter the shit out of it
Serious monopoly laws
Serious taxing levels
Serious regulations on safety and environmental impacts
We own the Tool
The Tool does not own us
It is not a political system that runs on automatic to create a more perfect union
Only the oligarchs sheep believe it’s the end all be all
Even the Oligarchs believe what I’m saying here
You are the tools of evil if you back the lies the Oligarchs feed you
Child brained tools of evil
I am a true capitalist
I know capitalism is merely a tool
I know how to use that tool
I’ve read enough history to see how to use it as a tool to benefit mankind
You Fetter the shit out of it
Serious monopoly laws
Serious taxing levels
Serious regulations on safety and environmental impacts
We own the Tool
The Tool does not own us
Smoke some more meth. You are as always, an utter fool.
You are dumb as a brick, CCP Bot-Hole.
Capitalism is an economic system based on free and uncoerced trade between people without the involvement of those not party to the trade. Value for value.
evince
Truthmatters
Lame insults in the face of history
And math
And science
Don’t buy you much anymore huh oligarch sheeple
evince
Truthmatters
Capitalism is a tool
It is not a political system that runs on automatic to create a more perfect union
Only the oligarchs sheep believe it’s the end all be all
Even the Oligarchs believe what I’m saying here
You are the tools of evil if you back the lies the Oligarchs feed you
Child brained tools of evil
I am a true capitalist
I know capitalism is merely a tool
I know how to use that tool
I’ve read enough history to see how to use it as a tool to benefit mankind
You Fetter the shit out of it
Serious monopoly laws
Serious taxing levels
Serious regulations on safety and environmental impacts
We own the Tool
The Tool does not own us
It is not a political system that runs on automatic to create a more perfect union
Only the oligarchs sheep believe it’s the end all be all
Even the Oligarchs believe what I’m saying here
You are the tools of evil if you back the lies the Oligarchs feed you
Child brained tools of evil
I am a true capitalist
I know capitalism is merely a tool
I know how to use that tool
I’ve read enough history to see how to use it as a tool to benefit mankind
You Fetter the shit out of it
Serious monopoly laws
Serious taxing levels
Serious regulations on safety and environmental impacts
We own the Tool
The Tool does not own us