Comments by "oolong2" (@oolong2) on "HORRIFIC Child Labor Practices In Dangerous Meatpacking Facility" video.

@irishlady30 I don't need to work in a meat plant to know that kids wouldn't just start working if they didn't need to. We should ask why that is and why they feel the need to take these jobs, instead of just blaming the company they're working for. Whatever that situation is doesn't magically go away when we punish the company.
3
Although I kind of wonder if these kids would actually be better off if the company refused them work. In a perfect world no child would need to work, but these families are not coming from a perfect world. I'm sure there is a reason they were seeking work to begin with and if we punish the company without understanding the underlying issue, we may not be making their situation's better.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow Well if the "cost benefit analysis" leads to these kids and families being worse off than they were then I think it's a valid question. It's easy to sit on our high horses and think that if we punish a corporation we're actually accomplishing something, but if that is all we do and we don't actually address the root of a problem then all we're doing is allowing families and kids to starve just to feel good about ourselves.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow Yes, but the fact is we do live in this capitalist hell hole and we should think about consequences. What I didn't hear in this clip or from anyone else is an alternative for the family who currently has no choice but to let their kids work. If that isn't part of the conversation then what good are we doing here? It's also likely that people immigrated from a country where the typical working age is much lower than it is in the US. Not saying that child labor is a good thing, but to not even think about consequences at all is not really helpful IMO. It's basically putting moral superiority over a family's ability to survive.
1
@SuzakuX "Disingenuous" how exactly? Why is it so god damn disingenuous to ask the simple question of what is going to happen to a poor immigrant family or child when they lose a source of income? YES there are problems with our immigration policies. YES a large part of our food production relies on undocumented workers. But if people actually cared about these families then the thought of what happens to them SHOULD cross their minds instead of just worrying bout how big of a fine a corporation should get. People get immediately triggered when someone asks a simple question that goes against the narrative. As if everyone should just nod in agreement and move on. I'm sorry if I'm a bit more thoughtful than that. I'm sorry if I'm thinking about the actual people behind each and every one of these situations. Sheesh....
1
@@Wow2wow2wow My argument is asking about the overall welfare of these families after loosing a source of income. Your argument is to be sanctimonious regardless of the outcome. It's honestly no different than the right wing's obsession with drag queens reading books to children. It's more about moral outrage rather than the impact to the actual people involved. There was nothing in this clip describing lower wages depending on your age or bad treatment. You also very well know there is little chance that an undocumented worker would be awarded wages or a "settlement" for working illegally. You're only saying that now as a response to actually thinking about the possible impact to these families. Understand that the world is far more grey than the black and white you're making it out to be. Lots of people don't have that luxury when trying to survive.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow That isn't what I said. What I said was that the right wing moral outrage against drag queens reading stories to children and assuming it is automatically bad for them is similar to the moral outrage here of automatically assuming that an underage undocumented migrant working is worse off than not having that job at all. There are bad situations and there are worse situations. You can assume these kids work, not because some evil company kidnapped them, but it was out of necessity. If you are not addressing that at all or even thinking about it, then all you're doing is making yourself feel better while not actually helping these undocumented families.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow ---"I think that kids are worse off working as an undocumented child for a meat plant then they'd be if they were unemployed" If that is your perception then I think you are completely misunderstanding the situation that a lot of these families are in. It would be worth talking to these people rather than just infantilizing them and pretending they have absolutely no agency outside of a corporations whims. Again, it's not like people were kidnapped and forced to work. They came to the plant looking for work and someone looked the other way when hiring them. Also we're not going to magically fix a decades long Immigration problem tomorrow. So what exactly do you expect millions of families to do TODAY? Starve and be homeless in order to stick to your moral standards? Kicking people off a job does not change their current economic hardship one bit. It only makes it worse. Moral absolutes are easy when you're not in a situation that requires challenging them. Leaving hardship and violence, risking death by crossing deserts and borders, immigrating to a country illegally, working in a country illegally, etc. These are all choices people made because they didn't have better ones. Just like building a wall doesn't make that situation better, nether does kicking people off jobs or fining companies.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow My comments weren't meant to be specific to you. I was just making general statements. Also you shouldn't frame someone's argument as "conservative" when you have no idea where I'm coming from. It's as if people cannot question something without being put into a box. You don't like it when it's done to you, so you shouldn't do it to me. Capitalism is coercive and manipulative, but you haven't explained the manipulation by this company in this specific case. There isn't anything indicating that people were being forced to work or abused. You and others are simply making that up. All we know is that people were hired without questioning age or citizenship. There are millions of undocumented people working all over the country, obviously not every one is being abused or forced to work. Asking whether these families are better or worse off is a question that should be asked if people actually care about them. Don't you think? The company firing a bunch of people so they are not liable doesn't seem like the outcome you wanted. So what should they have done? Not offered the work at all? Not hire people that are sympathetic to undocumented migrants and only hire US citizens? There are always long term solutions to problems, but a lot of people need to do what they have to today in order to get by.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow We already know that the company hired underaged workers. So you're not saying anything different. What we don't know is whether it was individual supervisors not caring who they were hiring or if it was something else. Also keep in mind that the families and kids involved sought out this work to begin with. It's not like they were completely oblivious to what they were doing. Like I sad we shouldn't infantilize people and pretend they don't have agency in what they are doing. We should ask why they are working there and what the alternatives are.... Instead we're only focusing on the "evil company" without offering alternatives. I'm all for community efforts as well as providing a safety nets and aid for people. But that should be part of the conversation before fining companies and forcing them to throw a lot of people out of work... My biggest problem is only looking at it from one side of the equation, because I can guarantee that if there were legal, safer, and better alternatives, then those immigrants would have already choose those options and wouldn't be working at meat plants. But when you have language and legal issues, then your options are FAR more limited than your average US citizen. A lot of times these "under the table" and "legally questionable" jobs are all people have. For some families, taking those jobs away might be the difference between being poor and living in poverty.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow I read two articles on the topic and they both said what I already knew. That the company was fined for hiring underaged workers and the company claims they misrepresented their age, that it wasn't their policy and that the people involved were fired. Now if you have a source that contains actual evidence on their alleged "abuse of workers" then please share it. Otherwise I can only go based on what I know. --"So you think capitalism is exploitive but also the people being exploited are responsible for their exploitation?" I think we're all exploited, but that doesn't change the reality of what I said. Nor does it automatically make a company evil for offering to pay people for work. We're all participating in this system and we're not going to magically change it anytime soon. However in this case you're making up "abuse" and "exploitation" just to make your points seem more valid. --"what you're suggesting is literally not an alternative, it is the current status quo." I'm trying to figure out the best outcome given the situation. You're suggesting that it's okay to send families into poverty as long as it matches your ideals. --"You have spent this entire conversation unironically ignoring anything that isn't let these kids keep working." I have spent this entire conversation asking what is best for these families given the situation. You have spent the entire conversation not really giving a crap. Literally saying that it's better for them to be unemployed without even caring what they think. --" Especially when that company dropped them on a dime when the investigation began." What do you expect them to do exactly? They got in trouble for people hiring immigrants they aren't allowed to hire. Should they keep those people employed and get shut down by the government? --"Poverty is being poor and being poor is poverty. Just separating the two with some text doesn't separate them as concepts." They are separate concepts. I suggest you look into that, and the poverty rate for immigrants is more than double that for US citizens. It's something to consider when you think about casually firing people without providing an alternative.
1
@@Wow2wow2wow Or maybe the best decision was to create support and alternatives for these families before taking it away? Or to consider the impacts of a policy before enforcing it? Again, if people had viable alternatives they wouldn't be working there to begin with. Do you not get that? Not sure why you're putting words in my mouth when I've already said this multiple times. We have lots of policies surrounding immigration ("sanctuary cities", etc.) which are based on selectively enforcing policy with the best outcomes for people in mind. I can read just fine. The fact that 3 people got injured at a company that employs 17,000 is not indicative of abuse or exploitation. Injuries happen at most companies around the world. Nowhere is there a description of the coercion, abuse, and exploitation that you described. If I'm working construction or at a restaurant and injure myself (which I have before) that does not automatically mean my employer is abusing me. We're both trying to lookout for people and yet you're getting needlessly upset over it... There are nuances to every situation and getting upset because someone brings up an alternative viewpoint in good faith is ridiculous.
1