Fancy Words Can't Hide Ugly Reality Of Child Labour In Thailand

[cup-O-coffee]

And what do people think these children should be doing if not working to earn some pocket money? Hanging around in the toilets of a Pattaya department store! Stealing! Pick pocketing! Then spending the cash in video arcades or online games.

As long as it is not forced labor, the hours are within reason, and the work not overly strenuous I see nothing wrong with a child working. I worked from the age of 13 washing cars & boats on Saturdays and school holidays. Friends delivered newspapers or groceries. Earning our own money gave us a lot of self esteem plus we all turned out OK. None of us felt abused or taken advantage of.

You smell fresh off the boat. They are not working because they want too.. what child wants to roam the streets late at night selling flowers to drunk <deleted>?

Your talking about 8 to 10 year olds. You cleary dont have children, otherwise you wouldnt spew out, what a legend you was at the age of 13. Working in the safety of adults is completely different you ignorant little man.

Yes we all want our kids wondering around busy intersection, character building.

Nice thoughts, but only according to your posted views on what YOU think a child wants. Your views would only confuse the child, as I am certain they feel they are doing what they interpret as right. What makes your views more important than their views. It is their life, not yours.

As the undeveloped mind can be developed by certain factors (environment, other humans, etc.) how is it possible that you can call someone an ignorant little man with a line of thinking that you allow your children to make all their decisions in their lives on their own, without any influence from yourself? That is what you are implying, yes; that you have children and you do not enforce your views on their development, and instead allow them to do whatever they wish outside of the limitations and stimuli that you would other wise allow to be exclusively presented to them?

You are a acting the hypocrite in this stance.

The notion that children have the capabilities (without any influence from another human) to choose what is best for their lives is ludicrous, and to further suggest that their interpretations of happiness and sadness must fit your interpretations make what you are suggesting irrational.

Keesters could just as easily be congratulated for making sense of what some people interpret as practical for any given situation. Better that he did this than sit around and grouse about things that weren't right with his life.

I know of no human in documented history who raised his or her self to adulthood alone and without influence from others and was fit to blend in with any society without drawing attention to their selves. No; instead most young humans are almost always coached in their development consciously or unconsciously to develop their own sense of what is appropriate, inappropriate and what makes them happy and sad. Your views fit a very small paradigm in the broader scale of things.

[DocN]

And what do people think these children should be doing if not working to earn some pocket money? Hanging around in the toilets of a Pattaya department store! Stealing! Pick pocketing! Then spending the cash in video arcades or online games.

As long as it is not forced labor, the hours are within reason, and the work not overly strenuous I see nothing wrong with a child working. I worked from the age of 13 washing cars & boats on Saturdays and school holidays. Friends delivered newspapers or groceries. Earning our own money gave us a lot of self esteem plus we all turned out OK. None of us felt abused or taken advantage of.

You smell fresh off the boat. They are not working because they want too.. what child wants to roam the streets late at night selling flowers to drunk <deleted>?

Your talking about 8 to 10 year olds. You cleary dont have children, otherwise you wouldnt spew out, what a legend you was at the age of 13. Working in the safety of adults is completely different you ignorant little man.

Yes we all want our kids wondering around busy intersection, character building.

Nice thoughts, but only according to your posted views on what YOU think a child wants. Your views would only confuse the child, as I am certain they feel they are doing what they interpret as right. What makes your views more important than their views. It is their life, not yours.

As the undeveloped mind can be developed by certain factors (environment, other humans, etc.) how is it possible that you can call someone an ignorant little man with a line of thinking that you allow your children to make all their decisions in their lives on their own, without any influence from yourself? That is what you are implying, yes; that you have children and you do not enforce your views on their development, and instead allow them to do whatever they wish outside of the limitations and stimuli that you would other wise allow to be exclusively presented to them?

You are a acting the hypocrite in this stance.

The notion that children have the capabilities (without any influence from another human) to choose what is best for their lives is ludicrous, and to further suggest that their interpretations of happiness and sadness must fit your interpretations make what you are suggesting irrational.

Keesters could just as easily be congratulated for making sense of what some people interpret as practical for any given situation. Better that he did this than sit around and grouse about things that weren't right with his life.

I know of no human in documented history who raised his or her self to adulthood alone and without influence from others and was fit to blend in with any society without drawing attention to their selves. No; instead most young humans are almost always coached in their development consciously or unconsciously to develop their own sense of what is appropriate, inappropriate and what makes them happy and sad. Your views fit a very small paradigm in the broader scale of things.

WHAT?

What has anything you said, to do with this subject?

We are talking child labor here!

We are talking 6,7, 8year old children on the streets of BANGKOK ...AT NIGHT...selling (at best) flowers or cleaning car windows.

Is that your idea of an ideal childhood? Guided by loving parents in a careing society?

Mind developing?

These children shouldn't be there...no matter if they think they are doing the right thing.

No family should be in a position to make their children work like that!

We are not talking the paper- route, you were doing as a 14 year old on a Saturday morning in your hometown, that probably made you learn, that money doesn't come easy!

We are talking little children, contributing to the income of a family, which otherwise would not be able to support itself OR the children.

Now stop accusing others of hypocrisy and contribute to the subject of the UGLY TRUTH OF CHILD LABOR!

Thanks!

[scorecard]

Why doesn't the newspaper really attack this? Go out catch them - go undercover if you have to get the story. Take pictures, get them on the run. Break them. These things change when the news voice stays on top of it. Take pictures. Run exposes and continuous stories on it - smoke them out the abusers. Call attention to them - write about and photograph it! Do something to change instead of writing this meaningless tripe in this type of whining editorial. Instead of whining about Yingluck's sincerity the newspaper should examine its own sincerity and professional journalism standards.

What...and have someone lose face? Making general statements and criticizing the government seems to be the media's modus operandi. This way the newspaper has done it job by stating there might be a problem without offending anyone, including the guilty parties to this crime. There is no reason to go undercover since this crime is being committed in broad daylight. The headline should read: "Child labor flourishes in Thailand, and anyone who can do anything about it doesn't care".

Investigative tenacious journalism, sounds great, but:

- Sadly, Thai journalists aren't trained for this, they have close to zero / zero investigative / detective training or knowledge. Thai journalist are in fact reporters; listen to the speech write down what was said, rarely and questions even to get clarity on seemingly ambiguous points, and just regurtitate it in a news 'report', no analysis, no comment.

- No questions because of the strong danger of being sued.

- Would you be afraid to confront a large % of what we call politicians in Thailand, many businessmen, most police and military officers? Do you want your (or a member of your familys') legs broken or much worse?

Edited October 6, 2012 by scorecard

[cup-O-coffee]

And what do people think these children should be doing if not working to earn some pocket money? Hanging around in the toilets of a Pattaya department store! Stealing! Pick pocketing! Then spending the cash in video arcades or online games.

As long as it is not forced labor, the hours are within reason, and the work not overly strenuous I see nothing wrong with a child working. I worked from the age of 13 washing cars & boats on Saturdays and school holidays. Friends delivered newspapers or groceries. Earning our own money gave us a lot of self esteem plus we all turned out OK. None of us felt abused or taken advantage of.

You smell fresh off the boat. They are not working because they want too.. what child wants to roam the streets late at night selling flowers to drunk <deleted>?

Your talking about 8 to 10 year olds. You cleary dont have children, otherwise you wouldnt spew out, what a legend you was at the age of 13. Working in the safety of adults is completely different you ignorant little man.

Yes we all want our kids wondering around busy intersection, character building.

Nice thoughts, but only according to your posted views on what YOU think a child wants. Your views would only confuse the child, as I am certain they feel they are doing what they interpret as right. What makes your views more important than their views. It is their life, not yours.

As the undeveloped mind can be developed by certain factors (environment, other humans, etc.) how is it possible that you can call someone an ignorant little man with a line of thinking that you allow your children to make all their decisions in their lives on their own, without any influence from yourself? That is what you are implying, yes; that you have children and you do not enforce your views on their development, and instead allow them to do whatever they wish outside of the limitations and stimuli that you would other wise allow to be exclusively presented to them?

You are a acting the hypocrite in this stance.

The notion that children have the capabilities (without any influence from another human) to choose what is best for their lives is ludicrous, and to further suggest that their interpretations of happiness and sadness must fit your interpretations make what you are suggesting irrational.

Keesters could just as easily be congratulated for making sense of what some people interpret as practical for any given situation. Better that he did this than sit around and grouse about things that weren't right with his life.

I know of no human in documented history who raised his or her self to adulthood alone and without influence from others and was fit to blend in with any society without drawing attention to their selves. No; instead most young humans are almost always coached in their development consciously or unconsciously to develop their own sense of what is appropriate, inappropriate and what makes them happy and sad. Your views fit a very small paradigm in the broader scale of things.

WHAT?

What has anything you said, to do with this subject?

We are talking child labor here!

We are talking 6,7, 8year old children on the streets of BANGKOK ...AT NIGHT...selling (at best) flowers or cleaning car windows.

Is that your idea of an ideal childhood? Guided by loving parents in a careing society?

Mind developing?

These children shouldn't be there...no matter if they think they are doing the right thing.

No family should be in a position to make their children work like that!

We are not talking the paper- route, you were doing as a 14 year old on a Saturday morning in your hometown, that probably made you learn, that money doesn't come easy!

We are talking little children, contributing to the income of a family, which otherwise would not be able to support itself OR the children.

Now stop accusing others of hypocrisy and contribute to the subject of the UGLY TRUTH OF CHILD LABOR!

Thanks!

There is no ugly truth. There is only that which is. Not you, I, nor anyone else can stem the increase of what is in all the corners of the Earth; namely, ugly truths. But are they really ugly?

Quality of life is arguable, but even the most agreed upon solution will never reach the point of being evenly distributed among all the masses on this earth, either locally or remotely. Their are too many obstructions; environmentally, resource-wise, and those of the uneducated and undeveloped mind. There is no singular solution for all, and even one hundred solutions would fall short of the needs of so many humans of varied mentalities and behaviors which go awry of your interpretations of ugly and beautiful.

I am not disagreeing with you, but I feel that I am placing myself in a more favorable point of view that allows me to enjoy life without ulcers and nervous ticks. The burden of overpopulation on societies, governments and resources is a fact that is unavoidable in the near future. That is an ugly truth. But until the time that we face the consequences of breeding beyond the available resources to sustain ourselves, then we have to accept that people will do what they will do to scrape out an existence. It is the law of natural selection, and tampering with it without facing the issue of too many humans and not enough resources compels one to ask, "When is enough enough?".

People who cannot sustain children never bothered to ask me or anyone else (the people they would eventually be begging to support the results of their copulating) if it was alright to procreate those children, so why should I feel guilt, obligation, duty and responsibility to bail them out of the consequences of their ignorant actions? Please do not think that I have no sense of decency, but I remind you that there will come a time when all will have to choose between the quality of life of their own or that of others.

People talk about sustainability like it is a luxury or a badge of honor, yet the general population seems to avoid the impending issue of sustainability in the sense that we are damaging the Earth with our irresponsibility towards bringing life into this world without the means to sustain it and hence bring about "ugly truths" by irresponsible actions towards the quality of life for all society, and not just singularly.

Why should ignorant people get our nod of "decency" and "charity", and we blindly provide assistance, resources and sustenance as they continue to add to the issue of creating life on this planet without the means to sustain that life by their own means and methods? Again, when is enough enough?

You worry about the flower sellers and window washers, and I choose to jump ahead a few years to the time when "decent" and "idealistic" people such as yourself will be arming themselves because they are afraid of their bowl of rice being stolen. What makes it right to ignorantly have children when I know I cannot support those children? Or, to have children in the hopes that those children can work to make my own life better? Which is worse, because they are both "ugly".

There is no guilt in saying no to someone who has has no children. There is more guilt when that person is slinging three or four offspring in their arms and begging you to feed them. Why? Simply because they had them, and nothing more? We need better reasons for bringing life into this world, and causing that life to live your ugly truths. That is where we need to focus our energies.

Edited October 8, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[jshorts]

There is no ugly truth. There is only that which is. Not you, I, nor anyone else can stem the increase of what is in all the corners of the Earth; namely, ugly truths. But are they really ugly?

Quality of life is arguable, but even the most agreed upon solution will never reach the point of being evenly distributed among all the masses on this earth, either locally or remotely. Their are too many obstructions; environmentally, resource-wise, and those of the uneducated and undeveloped mind. There is no singular solution for all, and even one hundred solutions would fall short of the needs of so many humans of varied mentalities and behaviors which go awry of your interpretations of ugly and beautiful.

I am not disagreeing with you, but I feel that I am placing myself in a more favorable point of view that allows me to enjoy life without ulcers and nervous ticks. The burden of overpopulation on societies, governments and resources is a fact that is unavoidable in the near future. That is an ugly truth. But until the time that we face the consequences of breeding beyond the available resources to sustain ourselves, then we have to accept that people will do what they will do to scrape out an existence. It is the law of natural selection, and tampering with it without facing the issue of too many humans and not enough resources compels one to ask, "When is enough enough?".

People who cannot sustain children never bothered to ask me or anyone else (the people they would eventually be begging to support the results of their copulating) if it was alright to procreate those children, so why should I feel guilt, obligation, duty and responsibility to bail them out of the consequences of their ignorant actions? Please do not think that I have no sense of decency, but I remind you that there will come a time when all will have to choose between the quality of life of their own or that of others.

People talk about sustainability like it is a luxury or a badge of honor, yet the general population seems to avoid the impending issue of sustainability in the sense that we are damaging the Earth with our irresponsibility towards bringing life into this world without the means to sustain it and hence bring about "ugly truths" by irresponsible actions towards the quality of life for all society, and not just singularly.

Why should ignorant people get our nod of "decency" and "charity", and we blindly provide assistance, resources and sustenance as they continue to add to the issue of creating life on this planet without the means to sustain that life by their own means and methods? Again, when is enough enough?

You worry about the flower sellers and window washers, and I choose to jump ahead a few years to the time when "decent" and "idealistic" people such as yourself will be arming themselves because they are afraid of their bowl of rice being stolen. What makes it right to ignorantly have children when I know I cannot support those children? Or, to have children in the hopes that those children can work to make my own life better? Which is worse, because they are both "ugly".

There is no guilt in saying no to someone who has has no children. There is more guilt when that person is slinging three or four offspring in their arms and begging you to feed them. Why? Simply because they had them, and nothing more? We need better reasons for bringing life into this world, and causing that life to live your ugly truths. That is where we need to focus our energies.

And, how do you feel about this thread's topic: Child Labor in Thailand?

[cup-O-coffee]

There is no ugly truth. There is only that which is. Not you, I, nor anyone else can stem the increase of what is in all the corners of the Earth; namely, ugly truths. But are they really ugly?

Quality of life is arguable, but even the most agreed upon solution will never reach the point of being evenly distributed among all the masses on this earth, either locally or remotely. Their are too many obstructions; environmentally, resource-wise, and those of the uneducated and undeveloped mind. There is no singular solution for all, and even one hundred solutions would fall short of the needs of so many humans of varied mentalities and behaviors which go awry of your interpretations of ugly and beautiful.

I am not disagreeing with you, but I feel that I am placing myself in a more favorable point of view that allows me to enjoy life without ulcers and nervous ticks. The burden of overpopulation on societies, governments and resources is a fact that is unavoidable in the near future. That is an ugly truth. But until the time that we face the consequences of breeding beyond the available resources to sustain ourselves, then we have to accept that people will do what they will do to scrape out an existence. It is the law of natural selection, and tampering with it without facing the issue of too many humans and not enough resources compels one to ask, "When is enough enough?".

People who cannot sustain children never bothered to ask me or anyone else (the people they would eventually be begging to support the results of their copulating) if it was alright to procreate those children, so why should I feel guilt, obligation, duty and responsibility to bail them out of the consequences of their ignorant actions? Please do not think that I have no sense of decency, but I remind you that there will come a time when all will have to choose between the quality of life of their own or that of others.

People talk about sustainability like it is a luxury or a badge of honor, yet the general population seems to avoid the impending issue of sustainability in the sense that we are damaging the Earth with our irresponsibility towards bringing life into this world without the means to sustain it and hence bring about "ugly truths" by irresponsible actions towards the quality of life for all society, and not just singularly.

Why should ignorant people get our nod of "decency" and "charity", and we blindly provide assistance, resources and sustenance as they continue to add to the issue of creating life on this planet without the means to sustain that life by their own means and methods? Again, when is enough enough?

You worry about the flower sellers and window washers, and I choose to jump ahead a few years to the time when "decent" and "idealistic" people such as yourself will be arming themselves because they are afraid of their bowl of rice being stolen. What makes it right to ignorantly have children when I know I cannot support those children? Or, to have children in the hopes that those children can work to make my own life better? Which is worse, because they are both "ugly".

There is no guilt in saying no to someone who has has no children. There is more guilt when that person is slinging three or four offspring in their arms and begging you to feed them. Why? Simply because they had them, and nothing more? We need better reasons for bringing life into this world, and causing that life to live your ugly truths. That is where we need to focus our energies.

And, how do you feel about this thread's topic: Child Labor in Thailand?

Only that there is labor, and children are a part of it. It is what is. The reasons and conditions which require child labor to this regrettable extent are anathema, yet this is an issue that has no solution beyond stemming the tide of humanity that is growing at a greater proportion to the sustainable resources on this planet that keep us alive and happy.

Making sweet comments and wishing the best for them is merely a digression from the larger, ugly truth.

Edited October 8, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[DocN]

There is no ugly truth. There is only that which is. Not you, I, nor anyone else can stem the increase of what is in all the corners of the Earth; namely, ugly truths. But are they really ugly?

Quality of life is arguable, but even the most agreed upon solution will never reach the point of being evenly distributed among all the masses on this earth, either locally or remotely. Their are too many obstructions; environmentally, resource-wise, and those of the uneducated and undeveloped mind. There is no singular solution for all, and even one hundred solutions would fall short of the needs of so many humans of varied mentalities and behaviors which go awry of your interpretations of ugly and beautiful.

I am not disagreeing with you, but I feel that I am placing myself in a more favorable point of view that allows me to enjoy life without ulcers and nervous ticks. The burden of overpopulation on societies, governments and resources is a fact that is unavoidable in the near future. That is an ugly truth. But until the time that we face the consequences of breeding beyond the available resources to sustain ourselves, then we have to accept that people will do what they will do to scrape out an existence. It is the law of natural selection, and tampering with it without facing the issue of too many humans and not enough resources compels one to ask, "When is enough enough?".

People who cannot sustain children never bothered to ask me or anyone else (the people they would eventually be begging to support the results of their copulating) if it was alright to procreate those children, so why should I feel guilt, obligation, duty and responsibility to bail them out of the consequences of their ignorant actions? Please do not think that I have no sense of decency, but I remind you that there will come a time when all will have to choose between the quality of life of their own or that of others.

People talk about sustainability like it is a luxury or a badge of honor, yet the general population seems to avoid the impending issue of sustainability in the sense that we are damaging the Earth with our irresponsibility towards bringing life into this world without the means to sustain it and hence bring about "ugly truths" by irresponsible actions towards the quality of life for all society, and not just singularly.

Why should ignorant people get our nod of "decency" and "charity", and we blindly provide assistance, resources and sustenance as they continue to add to the issue of creating life on this planet without the means to sustain that life by their own means and methods? Again, when is enough enough?

You worry about the flower sellers and window washers, and I choose to jump ahead a few years to the time when "decent" and "idealistic" people such as yourself will be arming themselves because they are afraid of their bowl of rice being stolen. What makes it right to ignorantly have children when I know I cannot support those children? Or, to have children in the hopes that those children can work to make my own life better? Which is worse, because they are both "ugly".

There is no guilt in saying no to someone who has has no children. There is more guilt when that person is slinging three or four offspring in their arms and begging you to feed them. Why? Simply because they had them, and nothing more? We need better reasons for bringing life into this world, and causing that life to live your ugly truths. That is where we need to focus our energies.

And, how do you feel about this thread's topic: Child Labor in Thailand?

Only that there is labor, and children are a part of it. It is what is. The reasons and conditions which require child labor to this regrettable extent are anathema, yet this is an issue that has no solution beyond stemming the tide of humanity that is growing at a greater proportion to the sustainable resources on this planet that keep us alive and happy.

Making sweet comments and wishing the best for them is merely a digression from the larger, ugly truth.

Yeah...I guess, you are right!

dam_n, we just can't change the way of the world, can we?

So why bother or talk about it!

Mai pen rai, arai godai!

[whybother]

Only that there is labor, and children are a part of it. It is what is. The reasons and conditions which require child labor to this regrettable extent are anathema, yet this is an issue that has no solution beyond stemming the tide of humanity that is growing at a greater proportion to the sustainable resources on this planet that keep us alive and happy.

Making sweet comments and wishing the best for them is merely a digression from the larger, ugly truth.

I suppose it's just blind luck that countries like England, Australia, US, and European countries have no (or very, very little) child labour. After all, there's nothing that anyone can do about it.

[meatballs]

I really don't see what is wrong with child labor. It's a resource in many developing countries and to not utilize it would be a waste and in fact america used child labour when it was developing. US needs to get rid the righteous attitude.

[whybother]

I really don't see what is wrong with child labor. It's a resource in many developing countries and to not utilize it would be a waste and in fact america used child labour when it was developing. US needs to get rid the righteous attitude.

What IS wrong with child labour, and has always been wrong with child labour, is that it means that the kids don't get a basic education.

[F430murci]

Having children develop a strong work ethic is not a big problem if they are helping their impoverished families. But porn and sexual slavery is disgusting and parents their teach their daughters to sell themselves to farangs in pattaya should also be imprisoned.!

Are you saying that you approve of an 11 year old working to support his impoverished family?

Are you saying you approve of a 11 year old not working and him and his family starving to death.

Please tell me you are not condonning a 11 year old working in the sex industry to support his or her lazy, moral deficient abusive family. Yes, letting or forcing your 11 year old to work in the sex industry is aggravated child abuse.

[F430murci]

I really don't see what is wrong with child labor. It's a resource in many developing countries and to not utilize it would be a waste and in fact america used child labour when it was developing. US needs to get rid the righteous attitude.

No US just needs to ditch doing business with and giving money to countries condinning child abuse/labour. Economic sanctions not a bad idea either. Thailand can just partner up with other countries possessing high moral values such as China, some Eastern European Countries and a couple of the Middle East Countries.

[cup-O-coffee]

Only that there is labor, and children are a part of it. It is what is. The reasons and conditions which require child labor to this regrettable extent are anathema, yet this is an issue that has no solution beyond stemming the tide of humanity that is growing at a greater proportion to the sustainable resources on this planet that keep us alive and happy.

Making sweet comments and wishing the best for them is merely a digression from the larger, ugly truth.

I suppose it's just blind luck that countries like England, Australia, US, and European countries have no (or very, very little) child labour. After all, there's nothing that anyone can do about it.

Only if you are blind! Those countries have never experienced overpopulation. Nor do those countries embrace a religion (religions) which nurture a mind into static acceptance of issues and events that other countries take action against.

For example, consider that in Thailand there is no emergency until it happens. This parable is representative of the fact that there are no iconoclasts in societies where human suffering and ignorance prevails. Thais do not attack sacred cows because they are too employed with the appearance of their own "face". This blind obeisance has reduced the majority of their population to a description similar to a herd of cows being lead by very few wranglers.

It is bad enough that nature alone delivers challenges to societies, that unless those societies take immediate action, their window of opportunity dwindles into calamity. Yet when one adds man's own dark deeds (via religion and government) into the mix, and the blind, apathetic acceptance of the ignorant, you will not be surprised to find the similarities of this environment with those of, say, religious nuts cases who stand around waiting for the mother ship to land, or approvingly drink poisonous cool-aid as a means to problem solving.

On that note of problem solving, I disagree with cultures that seem to think it a viable solution to bring a human life into this world merely for the purpose of padding the selfish interests or self-gains of the two who engaged in this "kidnapping" from a better pre-existence.

Whether the excuse is that one is afraid of being old and not having anyone to take care of them, or to simply use the child as a means to a greedy end, I still feel it cruel to "kidnap" a human from what I daresay is a better pre-existence into an existence where there is continual suffering solely for the security or financial gain of the ones who wrenched them from that other happy place. It is a cold, unloving, apathetic and uncaring existence for them to be sure. But they get used to it, it seems, as they are spared the memories where they came from.

It is regrettable that children cannot petition to not being born into this world. I think we would find that we would not have an overly large world population were that so. I am also certain that those unborn children would not petition against being born over issues of money or lack thereof, but rather petition against being born were it not guaranteed that they were to go into a warm, secure home, with loving people all around and good food to sustain ones self.

But instead, the unborn have no say. No one is able to ask them if they want to be born, and instead the gift of human life is engage by those already here in this plane of existence, and whose minds are ignorant of the pain they are creating, or are simply too dam_n warped and greedy to give a dam_n against using human beings as cattle to make their self-interests more secure.

My point in all of this is why can't it be made revolutionary that we respect life before it begins by making those responsible for wanting that life to provide a reasonable case for engaging in the creation of it; like a loan... if you can't provide means to pay it off, then you don't deserve a loan because you are a high risk.

The true purpose for this, I fear, is that human life is a viable resource to the evil purposes in this world. It is disposable and easily replaced. It is sad that religion is the only excuse against this, and added to that the few who have a common sense of decency, yet no nerve to risk their lives over it (in that I am guilty).

Anyway, another wish with enough potential as a fart in the wind.

Edited October 9, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[Thai at Heart]

I am surprised...if not shocked...about what many of you are writing here.

This is not the USA (or Europe)...so child labor is somehow...okay???

Helping the family and a fulltime job under extremely poor conditions (f.e. selling flowers on a busy street in Bangkok with no shoes on your feet) is somehow the same thing???

It is okay for a kid to work under inhumane conditions...as long as it is not sex- work???

Your dad being an a-hole on Sundays is somehow the same as 17 hours in a factory all day???

Sorry, but ....seriously, guys???

Working full time on the streets of course isn't ok, but, what percentage does this entail of all kids in Thailand? Very small.

There are very few factories employing kids and the kids talked about as being on building sites are often not Thai. i believe that there is not a significant child l labor issue in Thailand, but if you want to include helping parents in agriculture, then all measurement is impossible.

Kids going to school but helping parents out does not represent child labor.

let me get this right: if a family can not afford school anymore and is taking a 12 year old into the rice- fields all day long...is that "helping parents in agriculture"? Then of course I am sorry...a 17 hours day in a rice- paddy is EXACTLY what a 12 year old should do!

Read what I wrote. How can they be going to school if they are working in the rice fields all day? And as I stated earlier, in a previous employ, we used to survey the farmers we had under contract, 25,000 of them, and very very few of their kids (less than 10 families) didn't attend school. There are very few kids missing school to harvest rice as a full time job thankfully. Of course there are street kids just like in every country, but there isn't a significant amount of forced full time child labour in Thailand.

Lest we forget that just about every manufactured product in Thailand has an export component to major MNCs one way or another, and has had this for many decades. Haven't heard of Thai kids sewing together adidas footballs, or reaping Wal Marts rice recently, or putting circuits into boards for Toyotas systems. As though consumer action groups wouldn't love to get their teeth into a story like that. I think a more relevant discussion is whether or not all adult employees in Thailand are receiving their minimum mandated wages and conditions under Thai law.

If a kid goes to school, but helps mum and dad out after school or on weekends, or their holidays, this to me does not represent child labour. Love it or loathe it, the absolute vast majority of Thai kids of school age, go to school.

[whybother]

I suppose it's just blind luck that countries like England, Australia, US, and European countries have no (or very, very little) child labour. After all, there's nothing that anyone can do about it.

Only if you are blind! Those countries have never experienced overpopulation.

<snipped stuff that was completely irrelevant to there being child labour>

Anyway, another wish with enough potential as a fart in the wind.

Who's experiencing over population? England with 130K sq km and 53 mil people, or Thailand with 513K sq km and 66 mil people?

[Thai at Heart]

I suppose it's just blind luck that countries like England, Australia, US, and European countries have no (or very, very little) child labour. After all, there's nothing that anyone can do about it.

Only if you are blind! Those countries have never experienced overpopulation.

<snipped stuff that was completely irrelevant to there being child labour>

Anyway, another wish with enough potential as a fart in the wind.

Who's experiencing over population? England with 130K sq km and 53 mil people, or Thailand with 513K sq km and 66 mil people?

Indeed, what has overpopulation got to do with the potential for child labour? Having piss poor schools that the poorest can't afford to have their children attend, or geographically get to has to the biggest driver of this issue. Then making attendance compulsory, fining companies for employing them, adds the finishing touches, and bingo, kids go to school. This is more or less the law here for many years.

[simon43]

We are talking 6,7, 8year old children on the streets of BANGKOK ...AT NIGHT...selling (at best) flowers

That is clearly forced child labour and one reason why it is tolerated by the Thai authorities is because the children involved are primarily not Thai - they are Burmese, Cambodean and occasionally Vietnamese children who are forced to do this work by their adult 'minders'.

The police will round up these kids from time to time, but it is not the responsibility of Thailand to care for the unwanted kids of another nation. So back across the border they go to Myanmar and Cambodia, only to magically re-appear on the Bangkok streets again some months later.

Thailand is a well-developed country in south-east Asia, and suffice to say that it's population are not stricken with poverty. Perhaps the most common form of child labour you'll regularly see is where rural kids help their family with the harvest or buffalos.

Compare that situation with Myanmar (where I live and work with very poor communities). Here, young kids have no choice. They must work from a very young age, typically 7 or 8 years old, to help their families to earn enough money to feed themselves each day. For the kids that I teach, their education ends at 11 years old and full-time work begins.

That is the type of child labour that should be stopped - but without a paradigm shift in the economies of these poorer nations, there is no way on earth that hard and obligatory child labour will be ended.

Sad but realistically true

Simon

[cup-O-coffee]

Who's experiencing over population? England with 130K sq km and 53 mil people, or Thailand with 513K sq km and 66 mil people?

Indeed, what has overpopulation got to do with the potential for child labour? Having piss poor schools that the poorest can't afford to have their children attend, or geographically get to has to the biggest driver of this issue. Then making attendance compulsory, fining companies for employing them, adds the finishing touches, and bingo, kids go to school. This is more or less the law here for many years.

Overpopulation refers to the exceeding of certain threshold limits of population density when environmental resources fail to meet the requirements of individual organisms regarding shelter, nutrition and so forth. It gives rise to high rates of mortality and morbidity.

It has nothing to do with available real estate and more with what developed or undeveloped minds do, or do not do, with what they have on hand.

With regards to the comment asking how overpopulation having anything to do with child labor, or about school as a singular solution, I concede to this single-minded approach.

Edited October 9, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[saengsureeya]

Yes guys, let's improve the World and start in Thailand...........why don't we adjust to the Thai standards and culture instead of the other way around.

Why is it always the foreigner with the nose in the wind who has to tell the natives in their own country how things should be done.

"Chase the kids", "Punish the parents", "Kill the thugs", what a load of crap.

It's pretty common that kids work here.....and with work I do NOT mean: exploited!

[DocN]

Yes guys, let's improve the World and start in Thailand...........why don't we adjust to the Thai standards and culture instead of the other way around.

Why is it always the foreigner with the nose in the wind who has to tell the natives in their own country how things should be done.

"Chase the kids", "Punish the parents", "Kill the thugs", what a load of crap.

It's pretty common that kids work here.....and with work I do NOT mean: exploited!

Oooooooh...if it is common and I am just a foreigner with a nose in the wind...let's close the thread than, shall we?!

Move on...there is nothing to be seen here...

[bbox]

I know this sounds a little bit harsh, but these uneducated labourers etc are exactly the type of people that have grown up to be Thaksin/Pheua Thai supporters. Educate them, give them a real future, and they might just vote Democrat.

Yes child labor is wrong, the wages paid to adults is wrong........but you don't have to be educated to see right from wrong.......never vote Democrat.

[toybits]

Went to a PTT Gasoline station at Chiang Rai (along Phaholyothin) near Western entrance to Robinson/Central and the attendants there were all young boys not more than 15 years of age. I don't think I will ever go back there again.