You have WAY too much time on your hands.

Your K9 friend has been invited to leave the conversation. She asked me to tell you that she knows it gets lonely in the desert and she is rooting for you.

She says to take good care of yourself.

***2-13-2010 @ 5:27pm, You said “child labor imposes a cost on adult workers by expanding the supply of labor and providing capital a cheap and more easily “managed” workforce. And by doing so, parents are kept in desperate circumstance and forced to “choose” to send their children to work”, you restated this position again at February 14, 2010 at 12:39 am

###To which I responded, “What are your numbers on the adult workers?”

***at February 14, 2010 at 6:37 pm , absent any employment data, you add this “it undermines the work opportunities and wages of adults who could otherwise better support their children, thereby reinforcing the poverty that forces their children to work…”, basically a 2nd restatement of the first point I take issue with.

and you added, “There is no shortage of adults in these labor markets.”, and that the benefits of restricting child labor, the “increase in jobs and rise in wages for adults is a secondary effect and takes some time to unfold”

###So at February 14, 2010 at 9:32 pm I responded to this quote directly with another request for data. I was challenging your point that the wages and employment rates of adults and by extension the welfare of the children would improve as more children were restricted from the workforce.

While dubious, I never challenged that there were lots of adults who could be working, I only asked that you show me the numbers if you were going to make such an assertion. But if the benefits are going to take some time to unfold, credible data on this would help.

***At February 15, 2010 at 3:03 pm you go so far as to suggest that it is my responsibility to fact your un supported claims, “If it’s so easy, why didn’t you do it?”. You then cite data to show that adult unemployment is very high. A point I will happily concede.

You then cite Nurul Hague, Area Coordinator, Plan International Bangladesh, who says that the rise in child labor is CAUSED by adult unemployment, “Main factors among those contributing to child labour are rapid population growth, ADULT UNEMPLOYMENT”. She was actually saying that the causes for child labor are so varied that it’s cruel to just turn them out of a job.

###I asked how that shows that removing children from the workforce makes anyone’s life better and I ask you to support your answer with credible data. Apparently supporting your arguments with research is “[My] homework” in your world.

***At February 15, 2010 at 8:10 pm, you cite a “Financial Express” article ” Higher unemployment, maternal mortality rates major threat to achieving MDGs by 2015. to show high levels of available adult workers I suppose. The data is suspect because the website looks dodgy and doesn’t link sources, but I don’t dispute it out of hand.

You also cite ILO and BBS statistics showing a rise in adult unemployment between 1995 (when the child labor laws were being implemented) and 2000, “1995-95: 1.3%; 1999-2000: 9.5%”

###At February 15, 2010 at 9:57 pm, I cite data from the ILO and the University of Sydney that show that during this time frame levels of child labor shrank or grew much more slowly than the employment rate of adults. And state further that children make up only about 10% of the total workforce meaning that even if child labor were abolished completely, it would not greatly affect the lives of adults.

***Now you ask, “Show me your data that supports the claims that (1) economic growth is generating big increases in employment and (2) there are inadequate numbers of unemployed adults available to fill the ranks of child laborers if they are sent to school.”

###I never said there was big economic growth or increases in employment. to the contrary, in hard times it seems doubly heartless to fire anyone, especially a kid.

***You say “The average annual rate of increase in GDP in Bangladesh Between 1990-91 and 1994-95, was 4.1%, between 1995-96 and 1999-2000 was 5.6%.. (Source: Government of Bangladesh, Ministry of Finance, Economic Survey of Bangladesh 2000)”,

You challenge me “You’ve presented no data whatsover supporting a claim that the children we know to have been laid off are any worse off. It has all been speculation or “logic”. Yet I have cited the opinion of several expert sources, many within documents that you yourself cite, to that very effect.

###So a change in the annual rate of gdp increase between these two periods changed by 1.5%, During that time frame things were good for Bangladesh, probably why their unemployment was less than ours is now. You seem to be saying that ” economic growth [isn't] generating big increases in employment” and you support it with statistics that show decent economic growth and low unemployment with unemployment getting worse as more children are removed from the labor pool.

### But in all of this we can come back to the beginning, where you said that restricting child labor will lead to better employment opportunities for the adults. that it will lead to a better life for the children.

###If you take everything else away for a moment, at least acknowledge that you made this claim, and have yet shown that employment has gotten better for adults or that the lives of the children have gotten better.

There you go again; making stuff up:

“I have supported all of my assertions with statistics and data.”

Show me your data that supports the claims that (1) economic growth is generating big increases in employment and (2) there are inadequate numbers of unemployed adults available to fill the ranks of child laborers if they are sent to school.

I’ve presented my data. But you won’t because you don’t have any. You’ll just claim you presented it in a previous post when you haven’t.
——————–

“You have show [sic] that during the time when children were being pulled from the workforce fastest, by child labor restrictions predominantly, the economy slowed and adult unemployment soared.”

Only half right, Benk. (But then that’s better than average for you.)

I have “show” nothing about economic growth. You made that up. But now I will.

The average annual rate of increase in GDP in Bangladesh between 1995-96 and 1999-2000 was 5.6%. Between 1990-91 and 1994-95, it was 4.1%. (Source: Government of Bangladesh, Ministry of Finance, Economic Survey of Bangladesh 2000)

So to spell it out for you: “during the time when children were being pulled from the workforce,” (1) economic growth accelerated sharply, it did not decline, and (2) despite stronger economic growth, unemployment rates among adult males with no education increased sharply, demonstrating…

– that economic growth did not “raise all boats” as claimed by you laissez faire types and
– that there were plenty of adult males to fill the jobs children held.
—————-

“I asked you to show me evidence that the wages or employment rates of adults would improve after child labor restrictions were put into place and you show me the opposite.”

Show me where you asked this. You see, I presented the unemployment data to answer your challenge to my claim “There is no shortage of adults in these labor markets.”, to which you responded “so you should have no problem finding government data to back this claim up.” Which is exactly what I did. You were right, it was “no problem” at all.
——————————

“This was your central argument…. My data shows the opposite all the way to 2006.”

This is a ridiculous claim. You have no such data because it doesn’t exist. The data you have is incapable of “show[ing] the opposite all the way to 2006″ because the miniscule effect of reductions in child labor (to the extent there was any) is overwhelmed by all the other economic and social factors affecting unemployment rates during that period.
———————-

You better cut back on the Puppy-Tear Mojitos, Benk, because you’re becoming delusional.

“I have shown data and logic to support my position that the children fired by factories end up worse off.”

You’ve presented no data whatsover supporting a claim that the children we know to have been laid off are any worse off. It has all been speculation or “logic”. Show me the data (and anecdotes are not data).

I have supported all of my assertions with statistics and data. Again I’ll explain your data to you. You have show that during the time when children were being pulled from the workforce fastest, by child labor restrictions predominantly, the economy slowed and adult unemployment soared.

I asked you to show me evidence that the wages or employment rates of adults would improve after child labor restrictions were put into place and you show me the opposite.

This was your central argument. You even justified worsening these kids lives by saying that eventually they would be better off because their parents would get more jobs, but it’s a delayed effect. My data shows the opposite all the way to 2006.

So make a Socratic attempt at defending your position please. Cite some data that shows that the children in Bangladesh or at the very least their parents lives improved after the factories started kicking kids out. Or concede that your basis in advocating child labor restrictions is not the welfare of the people of that region. Or concede that you were wrong.

I have shown data and logic to support my position that the children fired by factories end up worse off. With your statistics I would expand that to say that with the practice of restricting child labor in full bloom, economic growth in the region has slowed to a crawl and rampant unemployment of adults has occurred as well.

Can you answer that point without sidestepping it or resorting to ad hominem and insults? You haven’t yet. Otherwise we’re just beating this poor horse into a pile of authentic Brazilian Fajitas.

I’ll be kicked back on my Orphan-Leather Couch sipping Puppy-Tear Mojitos while I wait.

For $50K a year, you should try to be at least as accurate as Wikipedia. Yet another example of the myth of the rational market…

Seriously? Kids pay $50K a year to go to Rochester and you don’t know that Utilitarianism is known as the greatest happiness principle?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism

Now I understand why tenure is so important to you.