NationStates Jolt Archive

Repeal of Child Labor Resolution #14
Human Rights
------------------
GIVEN that many developing nations do not have a strong economic foundation,

ACKNOWLEDGED that there may be hazards in a workplace, but

ALLOWING for basic regulations to be put in place to help reduce said hazards,

REALIZING that it should not be the place for one bill to determine what is moral or immoral,

The United Socialist States of Jencsovia hereby propose a repealing of Resolution #14 to help increase the workforce and stimulate growth of the economy in developing nations.

First, get rid of your name in the proposal, that's unkosher.

Next, don't make it even look like you're proposing new legislation. This is a repeal. A repeal only removes legislation, so it should have a compelling argument to convince people that the legislation should be repealed. You haven't developed your argument.

You have your conclusion, which is "Resolution #14 should be repealed." Fine. Your premises are weak, however. You fail to explain what a weak economic foundation has to do with why Res 14 should be repealed. You fail to explain how hazards relate to Res 14. Then it almost looks like your proposing regulations with the ALLOWING clause.

Basically, your premises don't lead to your conclusion. It's a non-sequitur.

You have your conclusion. Now, rewrite your premises so that they offer evidence as to why your conclusion is true.

This seems to put up no real argument against the policy it just is a seris of unconnected thoughts

GIVEN that many developing nations do not have a strong economic foundation,

ya... so...

ACKNOWLEDGED that there may be hazards in a workplace, but

Is this an argument and is this sentence supposed to be finished in the next clause.

ALLOWING for basic regulations to be put in place to help reduce said hazards,

Repeals don't allow anything only they get rid of resolutions. Another time you didn't argue against the resolution.

REALIZING that it should not be the place for one bill to determine what is moral or immoral,

So instead of one you want two? Maybe I'll give you 3... Or maybe you want to get rid of the human rights catagory... this could mean ANYTHING.


The United Socialist States of Jencsovia hereby propose a repealing of Resolution #14 to help increase the workforce and stimulate growth of the economy in developing nations.

Actualy if you can get adults to do the work instead it is much more effective. the only difference is you can't boss them around as much. Also maybe you should mention the fact that you are stimulating other idiots to make bad repeals:p

This is a very good repeal you give little reason why it is not. It stops child labour and promotes adults working instead.

You don't have the actual resolution always do that if you are making a repeal.

Yes, for future reference, when posting something that relates to prior legislation in the UN, leave a link to that legislation.

Thank you both for your input. I understand it needs quite a bit of work, and help along with the process is valued greatly.

Thank you both for your input. I understand it needs quite a bit of work, and help along with the process is valued greatly.

That's what you post it here for. Happy to workshop with ya, best of luck.

I'll be honest with you. Even if you can come up with the best arguments in the world for this, it will still have a ridiculously hard time passing. There are a great many who would oppose any attempt to remove legislation that is there to protect the wee little kiddies. Good Luck.

I call for the immediate striking of this Resolution, as it is an offence to this fine institution.

Dr Marcus Armont
Representative to the UN
Acting Ambassador Extraordinaire

Immediate striking?

I don't believe that seems fair.

I am merely attempting to draft a proposal to remove the current child labour laws and attempt to replace them with new ones. I fully understand that my intent was not clearly defined in the original post, which is why I have marked it as a draft.

Calling it an offence does nothing to help the process.

Immediate striking?

I don't believe that seems fair.

I am merely attempting to draft a proposal to remove the current child labour laws and attempt to replace them with new ones. I fully understand that my intent was not clearly defined in the original post, which is why I have marked it as a draft.

Calling it an offence does nothing to help the process.If that's the case, I would ask if the representative from Jencsovia presents a brief outline on any replacement.

Having said that, I don't think you have supplied any particular reasons why this does need to replaced anyway. I'm struggling to think of any.

Immediate striking?

I don't believe that seems fair.

I am merely attempting to draft a proposal to remove the current child labour laws and attempt to replace them with new ones. I fully understand that my intent was not clearly defined in the original post, which is why I have marked it as a draft.

Calling it an offence does nothing to help the process.
There is no way, irregardless of any drafting, this Resolution could be supported. It is an affront to the most basic principles of this esteemed body.

Dr Marcus Armont
Representative to the UN
Acting Ambassador Extraordinaire

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #14
CHILD LABOR
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Santa barbara
Description: GIVEN that many nation states see fit to employ children under age 12 in manual labor and industry,
GIVEN that these industries and labor are often highly detrimental to a child's body and health,
BELIEVING that it is a fundamental right to be given the chance to grow up educated and free from unneccesary disease, injury, and possible death from industrial work,
ASSERTING that it is immoral and atrocious to force children , by manipulation, authority or raw strength, to work for corporation or state,
Be it hereby resolved that the UN shall guarantee the rights of children to NOT work in any mines, factories, chemical plants or ANY OTHER industrial occupation; moreover, it shall be prohibited for a child to take up labor in such an occupation.We as much as we would like to see this one gone fear what might come along to replace it and have opposed other proposals to repeal this one due to that.

Suggest the the delagate from Jencsovia review the old debates on repeal of this and use it to help form a formal draft for this if they still see a need.

We at first had some concerns over this one but believe that since it sets no age to determine a child... as the opening is mearly a statement not setting anything.. and then the issue of Force.

As here at age 10 our children become citizens with certain rights and many go on to take part of even full ownership of such companies and factories that are deemed a hazard workplace. Thus they at that age go to work in those family companies or factories... and are not forced not are they then considered children.

Therefore any effort to change this to something that mandates the age between adult and child will not get out support. Also to take out the FORCE part and make it they can't be working period will get not get out support.

Thus we also would like to see the replacement you have in mind before you get our support for repeal and replace..

ACKNOWLEDGED that there may be hazards in a workplace, but
ALLOWING for basic regulations to be put in place to help reduce said hazards,Another was the fact that why should children be exempt from working in these areas that are a hazard to them thus would they not be to adults also? So why not prohibited it for anyone working in these areas or reguire safety standards that protect all workers... period regardless of age.

My suggestion is that you work on a proposal to promote standard safety in these areas thus remove the need for this proposal before you repeal it. As that would do more good than repeal this one would and force children into labor into these areas until something comes along to protect them like this one does. As it would then have no purpose since these areas would be safe for anyone to work in them...

My suggestion is that you work on a proposal to promote standard safety in these areas thus remove the need for this proposal before you repeal it. As that would do more good than repeal this one would and force children into labor into these areas until something comes along to protect them like this one does. As it would then have no purpose since these areas would be safe for anyone to work in them...

Resolution #146, 'Workplace Safety Act'...

There is no way, irregardless of any drafting, this Resolution could be supported. It is an affront to the most basic principles of this esteemed body.
The UN has no "basic principles". And, for clarity, what are you talking about: Resolution #14, or the motion to repeal it?

~Lori Jiffjeff
Acting Ambassador
Legal Aide
Minister of Sandy Vaginas
Chair of "Mothers Against Weird Shit"

There is no way, irregardless of any drafting, this Resolution could be supported. It is an affront to the most basic principles of this esteemed body.

Sorry for being OCD here, but irregardless isn't a proper word. It's just regardless.

Repeal of Child Labor Resolution #14
Human Rights
------------------
GIVEN that many developing nations do not have a strong economic foundation,

Aye, what of this?

ACKNOWLEDGED that there may be hazards in a workplace, but

"but" what?

ALLOWING for basic regulations to be put in place to help reduce said hazards,

Yes I'm sure most of us would agree with this, how does this further a repeal of this resolution?

REALIZING that it should not be the place for one bill to determine what is moral or immoral,

Initial reaction: That's it?

Second reaction: You are proposing repealing child labour based only on a constructivist interpretation of right and wrong? Pray tell me what is wrong with outlawing the forced and exploitative employment of children in dangerous work. The only conditions under which any support would be given from Compadria for such a repeal would be for a broader replacement incorporating agricultural labour to be included.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Anthony Holt
Deputy Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I'm consistently amused by those who think a repeal of Resolution #14 is part of an evil capitalist plot.

When, in fact, Resolution #14 itself is part of an (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Child_Labor#Controversy) evil (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9180624&postcount=16) capitalist plot (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=7096752#post7096752).

Mr Pratt's motives are irrelevant, still, at least it shows our bribery worked.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Anthony Holt
Deputy Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I wonder how it is so impossible to imagine that a capitalist plot could be used against another capitalist plot - especially when one considers that the former capitalist plot might, y'know, be ignorant to the latter.

I wonder how it is so impossible to imagine that a capitalist plot could be used against another capitalist plot - especially when one considers that the former capitalist plot might, y'know, be ignorant to the latter.
Especially because my nation is nowhere near capitalist. I am merely attempting to extend the work force to allow developing nations more of a chance to develop their economies.

Especially because my nation is nowhere near capitalist. I am merely attempting to extend the work force to allow developing nations more of a chance to develop their economies.
I'm not saying it is a capitalist plot, merely saying that the argument wasn't exactly sound.

I'm not saying it is a capitalist plot, merely saying that the argument wasn't exactly sound.
I understand fully, and I have taken note of everyone's comments, both for and against.

Hopefully I will have a sound draft by the morrow.

Wish me luck or failure, I care not.

But my next post will be with a new draft.

.......The only conditions under which any support would be given from Compadria for such a repeal would be for a broader replacement incorporating agricultural labour to be included.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Anthony Holt
Deputy Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Honourable Mr. Holt, would you seriously support a proposal which would prevent young children from working on a subsistence-level family agricultural project? Is weeding the cabbage patch not preferable to starvation? I am not a great fan of Res 14, yet one of its only saving graces is that it does not include agricultural labour.

And to the Ambassador from Jencsovia, you have much work to do, but the people of Realpolitika support your efforts and wish you well.

Sorry for being OCD here, but irregardless isn't a proper word. It's just regardless.Thank you for saying that. Have a weasel-on-a-stick:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/Silly%20Things/sam-n-max.jpg

Honourable Mr. Holt, would you seriously support a proposal which would prevent young children from working on a subsistence-level family agricultural project? Is weeding the cabbage patch not preferable to starvation? I am not a great fan of Res 14, yet one of its only saving graces is that it does not include agricultural labour.

And to the Ambassador from Jencsovia, you have much work to do, but the people of Realpolitika support your efforts and wish you well.

I meant more exploitative agricultural labour, not run-of-the-mill low level help, etc.

OOC: For an RL example, look up info on Turkish cotton farming.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Anthony Holt
Deputy Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

From the desk of
Oleg Ivan'ch
Ambassador to Jencsovia
20 June 2006
--------------------------------
With the current UN child labor laws, many countries with a struggling economy are falling further and further behind.

CURRENT EXAMPLES:

I] With a trailing economy, disease injury and death are at a higher standard rate.

II] In a situation where citizens of a legal age with children under twelve years old are unable to work, both the young children and the supporting adults are at a higher economic and health disadvantage.

III] With certain nations that have a struggling economy, many children could be employed in wide-spread agricultural businesses. In a developing nation where this is necessary, an agricultural career could be equally if not more so deadly.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A NEW LEGISLATION:

IV] Lower the restricted age or remove it all together. This will give family-run businesses a chance to expand and give more back to the economy.

V] A global law will be passed to require training and/or a test for all prospective employees to an industrial business. This will insure that all employees, not just children, will be fully trained and accidents in the workplace will reduce.

VI] Include a regulation for agricultural labor, be it thru testing of farming tools or something similar. This will reduce all accidents due to faulty or unsafe equipment.

PROSPECTED RESULTS:

VII] With an improved resolution and new laws, children's rights can be defined much clearer.

VIII] With said changes, children in economically developed nations can have their rights fully protected and further their country through education. Children of less developed nations can also help to develop their countries' economies so that future generations may reap the reward.

The current child labor laws are harshly restrictive and strangle developing nations more than help. With a few simple changes, rights can be protected and nations can grow.

I'm consistently amused by those who think a repeal of Resolution #14 is part of an evil capitalist plot.

When, in fact, Resolution #14 itself is part of an (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Child_Labor#Controversy) evil (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9180624&postcount=16) capitalist plot (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=7096752#post7096752).I agree. People don't seem to be giving the actual proposal any thought and automatically think it's some horrible plot.
In actuality, it's to better the economies of those nations where the economy isn't all that great. The phrase "child labor" doesn't always mean children being whipped, being denied food and water, and slaving away in the fields for low wages.
Get rid of the stigma and think for yourselves.

Carmella Florenzo
Ambassador for the Theocracy of the Internetz

Originally Posted by Jencsovia
IV] Lower the restricted age or remove it all together. This will give family-run businesses a chance to expand and give more back to the economy.


I will agree with your government about this, as long as the child labor remains in a family run business.

Robet Matthews
Teklet Department of Foreign Affairs

I will agree with your government about this, as long as the child labor remains in a family run business.

Robet Matthews
Teklet Department of Foreign Affairs
From the desk of
Oleg Ivan'ch
Ambassador to Jencsovia
20 June 2006
--------------------------------
Thank you greatly for the support.

I will most likely be submitting this proposal soon.

OOC: This is just going to be short because I'm very very tired and probably not making much sense anyways....

IC: The issue I see isn't whether or not developing nations will be exploiting children as a labour force, it's whether developed nations will. There are many who would, were this repeal to go through.

Just a thought.

Nations with high unemployment rates would use these children to increase their work force, but should only be hired if they are working at a family run business.

Robert Matthews
Teklet Department of Foreign Affairs

From the desk of
Oleg Ivan'ch
Ambassador to Jencsovia
23 June 2006
--------------------------------
Seeing as the comments are winding down, I will be submitting this proposal as posted earlier.