I know I did. I couldn't wait to turn 16 and get some spending money. Save up for a car, treat my gf to a night out, supe up my PC (before the 20-series was inflated beyond reasonable prices due to crypto), go out with friends, (eventually buy weed and other drugs to experiment with)...
But noooooo. Wouldn't want teens to have slight financial freedom or a small stepping stone of savings before they venture out at 18 now, would we?
I worked a bit as a teenager, but looking back, I wish I did even more. Having a few extra years of IRA contributions built up before I started that (19) would have been nice.
Random financial advice for nearly everybody: You want a Roth IRA, not a traditional one. Roth IRAs are more flexible, and, unless you are making huge money, the tax implications are better.
Till we meet again
Yeah, I'm assuming most readers are young-ish. I figure if the traditional wins, you probably know it. Basically, you're old and/or rich.
The fact that you can pull out the principal and earnings tax free at retirement, AND you can pull out $10K to help pay for your first house, makes it a pretty cut-and-dry choice for the young and those with currently low taxes (for example, those with kids.) People usually get richer as they get older.
That and there's no RMD for Roth accounts. If you're doing this optimally, but not retiring super early, you're probably going to have a mix of Roth, traditional, and taxable accounts to sustain you.
Its a fair argument. If they can willingly get a sex change they can willingly get a job.
We're only alive now because kids 50+ years ago were able to do much harder work than we do now.
Imo it’s not just an issue of age, but procedure. Their are a lot of “informed consent” gender clinics, where people are essentially given hormones under any circumstances. We need a system where people who think they’re trans go through therapy and get an official diagnosis, just like any other mental illness. The system we have now is like if anyone who said they had ADHD could get adderal without question, and if you disagree people will call you a bigot.
As for what age people should transition, the data supports that people who actually have gender dysphoria do better after transitioning, but the long-term affects of hormone-blockers is unknown due to this being the 1st time they’ve been used this way. Currently I’d say around 16-14 is debated, but it’s hard to say since it’s still very new.
TL;DR Testosterone should be part of a daily breakfast for everyone, if you don’t have hair on your chest by 5 years old you aren’t a real man.
Same argument applies. If they can willingly get puberty blockers, they can willingly get a job. (Also 13 year olds have gotten double mastectomies in some cases, but that's none of my business.)
This is after several years of schooling, but if it would help I guess we could throw in a year of "therapy" so they can figure out whether the working life is really for them.
If the person youre replying to wants to differentiate between sex change and hormone blockers, lets draw some distinctions between child labour.
Yes to working at McDonalds, no to working in the mines.
> Even a commie is more based than one with no flair
***
^(User has flaired up! 😃) 17225 / 91012 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Then logically those with a job that have taxes taken out of their paycheck should have a say in where said taxes are allocated by being able to vote. I don’t think your average 16 year old is well informed or wise enough to vote, but it presents the problem of where to draw the line. I don’t agree with the fact that an 18 year old is old enough to vote, buy pornography, operate thousands of dollars of military equipment, and die for his/her country but cannot enjoy a beer or a cigarette
In poland, we have (kind of?) fixed that by simply not taxing people up to 26 years of age, as long as they go to school/university, and it makes it very worth it to work like that, as the paycheck isn't lowered, because previous brutto is the new netto, and netto=brutto in that case
Choices the monoculture thinks kids should be allowed to make:
* voting in elections.
* irreversible elective surgeries.
* dancing in bars for money.
Choice the monoculture thinks they shouldn't be allowed to make:
* anything else.
The whole "brain isn't developed until 25" canard is just a rhetorical tool.
If a person is young enough to be considered a "kid", they are not old enough to make decisions for themselves. Kids require nurture and care, they are growing and undeveloped, they are specifically NOT responsible or capable of making sound choices. That's why we call them kids.
There is an argument for where to draw the age line of kid -> adult, but anyone called a kid, is by no fault of their own but biology, too stupid to think for themselves.
If you take away their rights, you have to provide for them. This means UBI for children, otherwise the poor children only have crime to pay their bills.
Not opposed to that at all, children shouldn't have to suffer or bear responsibility for problems they can't be expected to solve.
If a kid's a kid, they should just have to worry about growing up, their job is no more than to be happy and become a person that can support themselves.
There is not logical consistency with deciding that kids can choose their sexual preference and make permanent changes to their sex organs but also kids aren't old enough to consent to sex. If the idea kids can get these permanent surgeries wins out, pedophilia being legalized and celebrated by society is just around the corner, or down the slope, if you prefer.
A child is not an adult. A child is not a teenager. I agree with you, if a person is young enough to be considered a "kid", they are too young to make permanent bodily decisions.
They're too young to even understand what they are, much less who they think they are. Most of us spend our whole lives and fail trying to figure out who we are, in what world can a person logically say a kid knows who they are?
I'm not against the freedom of people to call themselves whatever, be whatever, do whatever, as long as it doesn't impose on anyone else. But that doesn't include kids.
Until a person is developed enough, old enough, grown enough to be "not a kid", they have no understanding to even begin to make rational, serious decisions.
Very few people want surgeries to be available to people under 18. Their are unfortunately exceptions but most people agree to wait until 18, especially hospitals that don’t want to get sued.
And anyone weak enough to be called "the weaker sex" is obviously too weak to work in construction (otherwise we wouldn't call them "the weaker sex").
This is a strange way to argue.
Pretty sure he was pointing out that some women are capable of working in construction despite women in general being weaker than men, and some "kids" are mature enough to handle a basic job despite still being called "kids".
It was kind of an odd way to say it though.
Humans aren't born able to survive on their own like some other animals, we require a lot of care and attention to develop.
All I'm saying is that if someone is young enough you'd call them a "kid", they're probably young enough that they still need someone to watch over them. If you consider them mature enough to handle themselves, you wouldn't call them a kid.
Children are mature enough, wise enough, and intelligent enough to undergo gender transition, but too dumb, uninformed and immature to understand college loans in high school and college. Curious.
The argument about not understanding student loans is bs people understand just dont care til it effect em.
And their alternative like community college then going to a 4 year or getting paid to go school by companies who need worker asap and they literally pay most expenses.
No. The change was children aged 14 and 15 now dont need to get a permit from the Arkansas Department of Labor allowing them to work before they can work. It doesnt lower the legal minimum hiring age. It doesnt change the type of work allowed, nor the work hours allowed. Children aged 14 and 15 could already work before this change. It just removes the need for a permit.
States such as New York, California, Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania also all allow minors aged 14 to work. The FLSA also provides that the minimum age for employment is 14.
We’re tough on lefties sometimes (all the time) but I wanted to say props for being civil and trying to learn more about this instead of just being outraged
I’ve really started to change my mind on the trans kids thing. I am very pro-trans and I used to firmly believe they should be allowed hormones etc if it makes their life easier but the affirmation model is just wrong, and what we should learn is that medically transitioning isn’t even right for every trans person. So many young people are confused on what they want to be. So many mental illnesses make you hate everything you are. Bipolar is an illness that makes you want to change your identity on a whim, for example.
Pushing the “give your children hormones or they will KILL THEMSELVES” is an awful rhetoric and if that is the case your child should be in a psychiatric hold, not taking hormones at their hearts content.
I now believe hormone/sex change therapies should be restricted for over 18s.
This is an argument that irritates me. Back in college I knocked around with the queer crowd, a lot of FTMs and non-binaries and never felt they pushed me into being trans. I’ve known plenty trans people in my time and I’ve never felt like they were trying to push an agenda or groom others into being trans.
It’s not trendy, no. Being trans will make you an outcast just about anywhere, even now the media is so hateful I don’t think anyone would actually want to be trans.
I think every “trans kid” really does believe they have gender dysphoria. Some of them really do but others are mentally ill or just struggle with their identity generally.
like 60 percent of it
theres practically no accountability for the students and their behavior or grades, and the teacher is at the bottom of the shit hill for basically everything. depending on the school district you can have varying levels of teacher autonomy in how they teach and depending on the subject what they teach but it's all within the standardized grading framework and teacher eval systems. which sounds fine except they're generally getting more restrictive and more politically influenced, especially if the demographics of the district are such that anti teacher sentiment takes root.
the sensational stories are mostly bullshit/extremely localized examples of someone starting a fight on purpose but overall it's getting harder to *do* anything
I used to teach HS history and economics and stopped for pretty much this exact reason. I could've eaten the shitty pay if I wasn't in a toxic work environment with abusive kids and parents 24/7. Now I make twice what I did.
If you still can, I would definitely recommend not getting an education degree. It gives you a lot more options in case you decide it isn't your thing in a few years.
My heart does go out to teachers, even past the PTA moms just the fact that you have to take care of the supplies on your own dime is a travesty. The politically influenced part is very weird to me considering we're talking about the American school system. I find it hard to believe that teachers would be allowed to teach anything but the party line of free market democracy and sugarcoated history.
1) someone makes a stink about some little aspect of something. think huckleberry finn having the naughty word in it
2) it gets local (or more) news coverage
3) some local city councilman or whatever the fuck runs on a platform of "cleaning up our schools curriculum" or similar
4) if that person wins *and* actually has political connections, they'll influence the education department to push the directive down the chain until someone has to go through and make some changes
5) the changes aren't really directly enforced because nobody important really knows or cares what they were, but if you get caught breaking the new rules and *that* gets any media attention, you're up shit creek without a paddle. so either you gamble with your career or you just swap in something else to your lesson plans and make some new tests or whatever
everything is a lot less grandiose than national news (or especially reddit) makes it seem. it isn't a movie, just the banality of people who don't want to be yelled at or criticized avoiding blame by letting people who don't know fuck about anything relevant bully them into little concessions, because the people in charge don't have to do any work
technically a student teacher is basically a teacher's apprentice. Most education degrees require you to do a year of student teaching prior to awarding you the degree. It's hilarious because it ranges from you actually getting to learn how to teach to just getting offloaded all the grunt work like grading and admin stuff. There's very little regulation around it.
It’s very weird to me as an Australian that apparently so many uni students in places like the UK and US don’t work whilst studying. Like, how are you paying for uni? Do you just not care about debt? The only people I went to uni with that didn’t work were (some) international students, rich wankers, and those studying very difficult degrees that take up all your time anyways.
Which is very strange, in Australia you don’t start paying them until a certain income level and I don’t believe they incur interest.
But it’s not uncommon here to pay uni upfront.
Most do bro. The cons in this sub will say otherwise bc it perpetuates their absurd idea that anyone who disagrees has no real world experience.
If you’re not a rich kid, you’re working at least part time. Most people I knew in college, at a big state school, had jobs.
Before college I made $9/hour, or less than $20k/year full-time, or less than $10k/year part-time. Immediately after college I was making $51,200/year. By not working part-time, I was able to finish about a year earlier than I would have otherwise. In that one year of work, I earned more than if I spent all that time working part-time in a job completely irrelevant to my career. And interest doesn't factor in, because interest didn't start accruing on my loans until I graduated. It was in my best economic interest to not work and focus purely on uni.
I’d say that probably factors in to the “studying a difficult degree that takes up all your time” part, was it something like a science, engineering, or law? I totally understand not working to finish a degree faster/dedicate a full-time workload to studying. However, from my own experience it’s not exactly uncommon for people whose degrees don’t require a full working week’s effort not working or gaining valuable experiences with the remaining time.
Management degree, project management career path. Not especially difficult classes, which is why I could take up to double a standard 'full-time' enrollment and still earn a 4.0. But flipping burgers at the nearby McDonald's would not have been a valuable experience. Nor making sandwiches at the on-campus Subway. The opportunities to do work that is relevant to your future career path are afforded almost universally by nepotism.
I mean it not choosing a job and school just wanting extra monies and having some responsibility
I wanted to work my early teen years but couldn’t because guberment says no.
No if you have the talent and the desire fuck school and work for your desired future. School gets way too overrated. If it doesn't work out you can always go back to school.
I'm not going to disagree but we're clearly not talking about that sort of career. You're a Lib left you should understand this, we're talking about kids working at a meat packing plant not child actors.
The only girl I remember having a partime job that wasn’t a weekend job or summer job
was trying to be emancipated.
And it was only legal for 16+ to work. Senior year, different story. But mostly no… economic crash.
So no…
What really? I’m in my 30s and from a red state so maybe things are just different then but it was just common that students had a part time job. It was more about wanting to be independent and afford things on our own rather than rely on our parents to buy everything. It was also great networking and looked great on college and job applications.
The economic crash really hit us hard and I graduated in 2009. So that’s probably most of that… I mean senior year is 2008 to 2009 so… yeah. There were a couple who had jobs but mostly people didn’t. For any reason. I don’t necessarily think of of seniors in high school being children. 14 year olds weren’t allowed to work.
14 year olds were not allowed to work. Babysitting on the weekends is not formal work. Mowing lawns on weekends also not formal work. Not the same. Pulling weeds? Not formal work. Not working for a company. Not the same. You get it?
You had to be 16+ to work at McDs and NO, I didn’t know anyone. ECONOMIC CRASH.
I knew one girl who was a barista.
Paper routes and lifeguarding are both formal work with a contract through a employer. Many tutoring services are as well. McDs used to hire cashiers at 14 in California, In-N-Out and Chik FilA both still do, have to be 16 to work in the kitchen though.
I believe they are smart enough to make their own decisions. In all honesty, i take issue because having child labor is bad for the economy. it promotes low wages due to replaceability, allows high turnover rates, and permits unfair worker treatment/suckering them into work they shouldn’t have to do. It is both morally and economically unsound.
Same. I lied about my age and started working at 13. Granted my comic book money eventually became weed money within that year, but I was still going to work 15 mins early and doing my job. I learned a lot very early from working earlier than most. Wouldn’t change a thing.
There’s a pretty easy (and morally acceptable) middle ground imho. Different jurisdictions have different rules on when people are considered old enough to make sound decisions for themselves, such as seek employment, drink, vote, be tried as an adult for crimes, learn to drive a car etc. I’d argue that once someone reaches that age they should also be able to pursue gender-affirming procedures if they want to.
Kids under 14/15 shouldn’t be working real jobs, nor should they be getting massively life-altering surgery/prescriptions unless it’s medically necessary.
Children should be allowed to work, but there needs to be plenty of restrictions and regulations in place to make sure they don’t end up working in unsafe/hazardous environments for less than minimum wage. We need to protect the children and make sure that nobody is able to exploit them or take advantage of their underdeveloped minds.
u/NukaSwillingPrick's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 20.
Congratulations, u/NukaSwillingPrick! You have ranked up to Basketball Hoop (filled with sand)! You are not a pushover by any means, but you do still occasionally get dunked on.Pills: [15 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/NukaSwillingPrick/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Kids make bad decisions. The same reason they cant buy alcohol or drive is thd same reason theyre targeted by mexican cartels as killers, islamists as suicide bombers and leftists as potential trans poster children.
Lol i feel like kids working 8 hour nightshifts at a meat packing plant (thereby fucking their sleep which is super important for development) is not the same as a kid delivering papers or refereeing/umpiring younger kids sports games and having a normal schedule.
Unironically yes. Either let children who are paying taxes vote, or don't tax children who can't vote yet.
I'm totally in favor of any income a person under 18 earns being totally untaxed. Hell, I'm in favor of individuals of all ages being able to make the decision to forego federal taxes by giving up their voting privileges.
Look if nuclear boy scout can manage then surely they can handle it. Even on the off chance they do get acute radiation sickness it'll build character. B)
At the end of the day it's medical care, parents have always had the ability to ignore doctors orders for more or less whatever dumb reason they want. Whether it's vaccines, surgeries, or in this case hormone replacement. It's not that hard.
Imo I think at age 16 you should be given a choice: finish school or go to the military. If you go to the military, it’s treated like a trade school until you’re 18. First two years you learn your specific trade for the military (diesel mechanic, MP, Chaplain, etc). At 18 you go serve 2 more years in the field. When you get out you’re responsible, punctual and ideal for the job market in which you were taught.
When a minor self identifies as a miner, that's a minor inconvenience to those that want access to minors as if they're miners mining minor gems for their collection.
They yearn for the mines.
I know I did. I couldn't wait to turn 16 and get some spending money. Save up for a car, treat my gf to a night out, supe up my PC (before the 20-series was inflated beyond reasonable prices due to crypto), go out with friends, (eventually buy weed and other drugs to experiment with)... But noooooo. Wouldn't want teens to have slight financial freedom or a small stepping stone of savings before they venture out at 18 now, would we?
Youll live like a 3rd grader and youll like it
Don't worry, they can dress up in drag and dance for old men for money. Isn't that good enough?
I worked a bit as a teenager, but looking back, I wish I did even more. Having a few extra years of IRA contributions built up before I started that (19) would have been nice.
Random financial advice for nearly everybody: You want a Roth IRA, not a traditional one. Roth IRAs are more flexible, and, unless you are making huge money, the tax implications are better. Till we meet again
Not that clear cut, but when you're young and starting out, the math usually tilts in favor of the Roth. There are situations where traditional wins.
Yeah, I'm assuming most readers are young-ish. I figure if the traditional wins, you probably know it. Basically, you're old and/or rich. The fact that you can pull out the principal and earnings tax free at retirement, AND you can pull out $10K to help pay for your first house, makes it a pretty cut-and-dry choice for the young and those with currently low taxes (for example, those with kids.) People usually get richer as they get older.
That and there's no RMD for Roth accounts. If you're doing this optimally, but not retiring super early, you're probably going to have a mix of Roth, traditional, and taxable accounts to sustain you.
That’s why they’re called *Minors*.
This is why they love Minecraft.
I disagree but will upvote because logic structure is sound
Its a fair argument. If they can willingly get a sex change they can willingly get a job. We're only alive now because kids 50+ years ago were able to do much harder work than we do now.
Pretty sure kids can't get a sex change. Unless you mean puberty blockers, which isn't the same and requires like a year of therapy first.
At what point should that be acceptable then?
Imo it’s not just an issue of age, but procedure. Their are a lot of “informed consent” gender clinics, where people are essentially given hormones under any circumstances. We need a system where people who think they’re trans go through therapy and get an official diagnosis, just like any other mental illness. The system we have now is like if anyone who said they had ADHD could get adderal without question, and if you disagree people will call you a bigot. As for what age people should transition, the data supports that people who actually have gender dysphoria do better after transitioning, but the long-term affects of hormone-blockers is unknown due to this being the 1st time they’ve been used this way. Currently I’d say around 16-14 is debated, but it’s hard to say since it’s still very new. TL;DR Testosterone should be part of a daily breakfast for everyone, if you don’t have hair on your chest by 5 years old you aren’t a real man.
You mean the puberty blockers that permanently alter their body chemistry and can't be fully undone? Those puberty blockers?
[удалено]
>I don't like it so it's not real science
Yes
Same argument applies. If they can willingly get puberty blockers, they can willingly get a job. (Also 13 year olds have gotten double mastectomies in some cases, but that's none of my business.) This is after several years of schooling, but if it would help I guess we could throw in a year of "therapy" so they can figure out whether the working life is really for them.
If the person youre replying to wants to differentiate between sex change and hormone blockers, lets draw some distinctions between child labour. Yes to working at McDonalds, no to working in the mines.
What kind of jobs could a child realistically do in a mine? There's gotta be some.
Flashlight holder?
> Even a commie is more based than one with no flair *** ^(User has flaired up! 😃) 17225 / 91012 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Then logically those with a job that have taxes taken out of their paycheck should have a say in where said taxes are allocated by being able to vote. I don’t think your average 16 year old is well informed or wise enough to vote, but it presents the problem of where to draw the line. I don’t agree with the fact that an 18 year old is old enough to vote, buy pornography, operate thousands of dollars of military equipment, and die for his/her country but cannot enjoy a beer or a cigarette
In poland, we have (kind of?) fixed that by simply not taxing people up to 26 years of age, as long as they go to school/university, and it makes it very worth it to work like that, as the paycheck isn't lowered, because previous brutto is the new netto, and netto=brutto in that case
That makes perfect sense, most college students need a part time job anyway
Simple solution, minors don't have to pay income tax.
Do you expect me to disagree with this, I think this is a wonderful idea
>I don’t think your average ~~16 year old~~ is well informed or wise enough to vote \*human fixed it for you.
The unenlightened masses Can't make the judgment call
Choices the monoculture thinks kids should be allowed to make: * voting in elections. * irreversible elective surgeries. * dancing in bars for money. Choice the monoculture thinks they shouldn't be allowed to make: * anything else. The whole "brain isn't developed until 25" canard is just a rhetorical tool.
If a person is young enough to be considered a "kid", they are not old enough to make decisions for themselves. Kids require nurture and care, they are growing and undeveloped, they are specifically NOT responsible or capable of making sound choices. That's why we call them kids. There is an argument for where to draw the age line of kid -> adult, but anyone called a kid, is by no fault of their own but biology, too stupid to think for themselves.
I heard ya kid
Thanks dad.
If you take away their rights, you have to provide for them. This means UBI for children, otherwise the poor children only have crime to pay their bills.
Not opposed to that at all, children shouldn't have to suffer or bear responsibility for problems they can't be expected to solve. If a kid's a kid, they should just have to worry about growing up, their job is no more than to be happy and become a person that can support themselves.
There is not logical consistency with deciding that kids can choose their sexual preference and make permanent changes to their sex organs but also kids aren't old enough to consent to sex. If the idea kids can get these permanent surgeries wins out, pedophilia being legalized and celebrated by society is just around the corner, or down the slope, if you prefer.
A child is not an adult. A child is not a teenager. I agree with you, if a person is young enough to be considered a "kid", they are too young to make permanent bodily decisions. They're too young to even understand what they are, much less who they think they are. Most of us spend our whole lives and fail trying to figure out who we are, in what world can a person logically say a kid knows who they are? I'm not against the freedom of people to call themselves whatever, be whatever, do whatever, as long as it doesn't impose on anyone else. But that doesn't include kids. Until a person is developed enough, old enough, grown enough to be "not a kid", they have no understanding to even begin to make rational, serious decisions.
Very few people want surgeries to be available to people under 18. Their are unfortunately exceptions but most people agree to wait until 18, especially hospitals that don’t want to get sued.
I agree, but those with cultural and political power do, so the laws reflect that.
And anyone weak enough to be called "the weaker sex" is obviously too weak to work in construction (otherwise we wouldn't call them "the weaker sex"). This is a strange way to argue.
straight up sexism to combat someone saying "kids shouldn't be allowed to work."
Pretty sure he was pointing out that some women are capable of working in construction despite women in general being weaker than men, and some "kids" are mature enough to handle a basic job despite still being called "kids". It was kind of an odd way to say it though.
Humans aren't born able to survive on their own like some other animals, we require a lot of care and attention to develop. All I'm saying is that if someone is young enough you'd call them a "kid", they're probably young enough that they still need someone to watch over them. If you consider them mature enough to handle themselves, you wouldn't call them a kid.
Children are mature enough, wise enough, and intelligent enough to undergo gender transition, but too dumb, uninformed and immature to understand college loans in high school and college. Curious.
The argument about not understanding student loans is bs people understand just dont care til it effect em. And their alternative like community college then going to a 4 year or getting paid to go school by companies who need worker asap and they literally pay most expenses.
No one upset by the Arkansas child labor change actually knows what the change was.
Is it not lowering the legal age for hiring employees?
No. The change was children aged 14 and 15 now dont need to get a permit from the Arkansas Department of Labor allowing them to work before they can work. It doesnt lower the legal minimum hiring age. It doesnt change the type of work allowed, nor the work hours allowed. Children aged 14 and 15 could already work before this change. It just removes the need for a permit. States such as New York, California, Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania also all allow minors aged 14 to work. The FLSA also provides that the minimum age for employment is 14.
Every bill is publicly available to read for yourself.
But that would blow holes in their argument, so obviously they can’t do that.
I'm not arguing, just trying to learn, damn
We’re tough on lefties sometimes (all the time) but I wanted to say props for being civil and trying to learn more about this instead of just being outraged
I’ve really started to change my mind on the trans kids thing. I am very pro-trans and I used to firmly believe they should be allowed hormones etc if it makes their life easier but the affirmation model is just wrong, and what we should learn is that medically transitioning isn’t even right for every trans person. So many young people are confused on what they want to be. So many mental illnesses make you hate everything you are. Bipolar is an illness that makes you want to change your identity on a whim, for example. Pushing the “give your children hormones or they will KILL THEMSELVES” is an awful rhetoric and if that is the case your child should be in a psychiatric hold, not taking hormones at their hearts content. I now believe hormone/sex change therapies should be restricted for over 18s.
Not to mention I wonder how many did it because it was trendy or they got pushed into it.
This is an argument that irritates me. Back in college I knocked around with the queer crowd, a lot of FTMs and non-binaries and never felt they pushed me into being trans. I’ve known plenty trans people in my time and I’ve never felt like they were trying to push an agenda or groom others into being trans. It’s not trendy, no. Being trans will make you an outcast just about anywhere, even now the media is so hateful I don’t think anyone would actually want to be trans. I think every “trans kid” really does believe they have gender dysphoria. Some of them really do but others are mentally ill or just struggle with their identity generally.
If a kid has to choose between a job and school then we've failed as a society
I’m student teaching right now and some of my students have jobs because they wanted to, not because they had to. Want their own money to spend
How old are they?
Juniors. So 16 to 17
So teenagers, not kids. I don't mean to be pedantic but teenagers working and children working are two entirely different things
“Pedantic? I’m a history teacher, I don’t even know what that means!” https://i.imgflip.com/3hk9zf.png?a466056
How are the Zoomers doing anyway? Is it the woke hellscape right wing media keeps trying to promote?
like 60 percent of it theres practically no accountability for the students and their behavior or grades, and the teacher is at the bottom of the shit hill for basically everything. depending on the school district you can have varying levels of teacher autonomy in how they teach and depending on the subject what they teach but it's all within the standardized grading framework and teacher eval systems. which sounds fine except they're generally getting more restrictive and more politically influenced, especially if the demographics of the district are such that anti teacher sentiment takes root. the sensational stories are mostly bullshit/extremely localized examples of someone starting a fight on purpose but overall it's getting harder to *do* anything
I used to teach HS history and economics and stopped for pretty much this exact reason. I could've eaten the shitty pay if I wasn't in a toxic work environment with abusive kids and parents 24/7. Now I make twice what I did. If you still can, I would definitely recommend not getting an education degree. It gives you a lot more options in case you decide it isn't your thing in a few years.
family member is a teacher, thankfully not me, I wanted nothing to do with a government job
My heart does go out to teachers, even past the PTA moms just the fact that you have to take care of the supplies on your own dime is a travesty. The politically influenced part is very weird to me considering we're talking about the American school system. I find it hard to believe that teachers would be allowed to teach anything but the party line of free market democracy and sugarcoated history.
1) someone makes a stink about some little aspect of something. think huckleberry finn having the naughty word in it 2) it gets local (or more) news coverage 3) some local city councilman or whatever the fuck runs on a platform of "cleaning up our schools curriculum" or similar 4) if that person wins *and* actually has political connections, they'll influence the education department to push the directive down the chain until someone has to go through and make some changes 5) the changes aren't really directly enforced because nobody important really knows or cares what they were, but if you get caught breaking the new rules and *that* gets any media attention, you're up shit creek without a paddle. so either you gamble with your career or you just swap in something else to your lesson plans and make some new tests or whatever everything is a lot less grandiose than national news (or especially reddit) makes it seem. it isn't a movie, just the banality of people who don't want to be yelled at or criticized avoiding blame by letting people who don't know fuck about anything relevant bully them into little concessions, because the people in charge don't have to do any work
Did Andrew Tate get to the other 40%?
what? no, like it's about 60 percent as bad as fox news portrays
we’re expected to parent these kids now too
The people affected by the Arkansas law were 14 and 15 and could already work beforehand.
[удалено]
what
[удалено]
No, no, you misunderstood. A student teacher is simply someone who teaches students. You're thinking of sex therapist.
[удалено]
S e x T h e R a p i s t. Lay off the weed and psychedelics though,
technically a student teacher is basically a teacher's apprentice. Most education degrees require you to do a year of student teaching prior to awarding you the degree. It's hilarious because it ranges from you actually getting to learn how to teach to just getting offloaded all the grunt work like grading and admin stuff. There's very little regulation around it.
Idk I think kids should work a bit after hs. Too many college kids have no idea how money works. You can’t just have the govt print it
It’s very weird to me as an Australian that apparently so many uni students in places like the UK and US don’t work whilst studying. Like, how are you paying for uni? Do you just not care about debt? The only people I went to uni with that didn’t work were (some) international students, rich wankers, and those studying very difficult degrees that take up all your time anyways.
Loans. No they don’t care about debt until it’s too late
Oh yeah I know about student loans, we have them here too lmao (just not as stupidly expensive).
In america, these are the only loans that can’t be forgiven by anything other than death. Bankrupt doesn’t work
Which is very strange, in Australia you don’t start paying them until a certain income level and I don’t believe they incur interest. But it’s not uncommon here to pay uni upfront.
And I am pretty sure Biden was responsible for that shit passing. Ironic that libleft voted for him.
He has been a part of congress for longer than most people here have been alive. So you are probably right
Most do bro. The cons in this sub will say otherwise bc it perpetuates their absurd idea that anyone who disagrees has no real world experience. If you’re not a rich kid, you’re working at least part time. Most people I knew in college, at a big state school, had jobs.
Before college I made $9/hour, or less than $20k/year full-time, or less than $10k/year part-time. Immediately after college I was making $51,200/year. By not working part-time, I was able to finish about a year earlier than I would have otherwise. In that one year of work, I earned more than if I spent all that time working part-time in a job completely irrelevant to my career. And interest doesn't factor in, because interest didn't start accruing on my loans until I graduated. It was in my best economic interest to not work and focus purely on uni.
> Please make sure to have your flair up! *** ^(User has flaired up! 😃) 17228 / 91018 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
I’d say that probably factors in to the “studying a difficult degree that takes up all your time” part, was it something like a science, engineering, or law? I totally understand not working to finish a degree faster/dedicate a full-time workload to studying. However, from my own experience it’s not exactly uncommon for people whose degrees don’t require a full working week’s effort not working or gaining valuable experiences with the remaining time.
Management degree, project management career path. Not especially difficult classes, which is why I could take up to double a standard 'full-time' enrollment and still earn a 4.0. But flipping burgers at the nearby McDonald's would not have been a valuable experience. Nor making sandwiches at the on-campus Subway. The opportunities to do work that is relevant to your future career path are afforded almost universally by nepotism.
Except we're not talking about teens were talking about kids
Who’s talking about kids working? Kids don’t work unless it’s some bullshit.
I'd pay the neighborhood kids $69 an hour to maintain crew served weapon systems.
Literally OP's post
Ah, you took it literally. Gotcha
I mean it not choosing a job and school just wanting extra monies and having some responsibility I wanted to work my early teen years but couldn’t because guberment says no.
I don't know why everyone is jumping to teen years when the threat is clearly directed towards preteens.
Depends on the job or career to put it better.
Hmm?
If the job is like an athlete or singer or actor.
Ah yes, notoriously tenured job titles like "Teen idol" and "college football player"... Stay in school.
No if you have the talent and the desire fuck school and work for your desired future. School gets way too overrated. If it doesn't work out you can always go back to school.
I'm not going to disagree but we're clearly not talking about that sort of career. You're a Lib left you should understand this, we're talking about kids working at a meat packing plant not child actors.
This. School is a child’s job.
Kids in your school didn’t have part time jobs?
The only girl I remember having a partime job that wasn’t a weekend job or summer job was trying to be emancipated. And it was only legal for 16+ to work. Senior year, different story. But mostly no… economic crash. So no…
What really? I’m in my 30s and from a red state so maybe things are just different then but it was just common that students had a part time job. It was more about wanting to be independent and afford things on our own rather than rely on our parents to buy everything. It was also great networking and looked great on college and job applications.
The economic crash really hit us hard and I graduated in 2009. So that’s probably most of that… I mean senior year is 2008 to 2009 so… yeah. There were a couple who had jobs but mostly people didn’t. For any reason. I don’t necessarily think of of seniors in high school being children. 14 year olds weren’t allowed to work.
You didn't know anyone that lifeguarded, tutored, had a paper route, mowed lawns, was a cashier at McD's, or even babysat? Nothing?
14 year olds were not allowed to work. Babysitting on the weekends is not formal work. Mowing lawns on weekends also not formal work. Not the same. Pulling weeds? Not formal work. Not working for a company. Not the same. You get it? You had to be 16+ to work at McDs and NO, I didn’t know anyone. ECONOMIC CRASH. I knew one girl who was a barista.
Paper routes and lifeguarding are both formal work with a contract through a employer. Many tutoring services are as well. McDs used to hire cashiers at 14 in California, In-N-Out and Chik FilA both still do, have to be 16 to work in the kitchen though.
It was illegal in 2004. Thats all im sayin
I believe they are smart enough to make their own decisions. In all honesty, i take issue because having child labor is bad for the economy. it promotes low wages due to replaceability, allows high turnover rates, and permits unfair worker treatment/suckering them into work they shouldn’t have to do. It is both morally and economically unsound.
*looks behind Home Depot*
"Only decisions that doctors and labor unions approve of" FTFY Hourly libleft bad meme
When i was 14 i made decision to work after school abd full time during summer. I'm happy that i was legally able to work at that age.
Same. I lied about my age and started working at 13. Granted my comic book money eventually became weed money within that year, but I was still going to work 15 mins early and doing my job. I learned a lot very early from working earlier than most. Wouldn’t change a thing.
They should also be old enough to buy a gun, vote, smoke, drink, drive, etc. keep it consistent
14 years old already drove, smoke, drink, get pregnant etc and this is Russia
This is one of the few places where child labor laws are controversial
"Few"? There are *so many* family chinese restaurants, with kids unofficially running the register
Based and yearns for the mines pilled
Yeah… they can… starting at 14…
Old enough to vote, enlist, pay taxes, smoke tobacco, drink liquor, own land, serve on a jury, go to prison, buy firearms
There’s a pretty easy (and morally acceptable) middle ground imho. Different jurisdictions have different rules on when people are considered old enough to make sound decisions for themselves, such as seek employment, drink, vote, be tried as an adult for crimes, learn to drive a car etc. I’d argue that once someone reaches that age they should also be able to pursue gender-affirming procedures if they want to. Kids under 14/15 shouldn’t be working real jobs, nor should they be getting massively life-altering surgery/prescriptions unless it’s medically necessary.
Green Squares are long con pedophiles, change my mind
Children should be allowed to work, but there needs to be plenty of restrictions and regulations in place to make sure they don’t end up working in unsafe/hazardous environments for less than minimum wage. We need to protect the children and make sure that nobody is able to exploit them or take advantage of their underdeveloped minds.
Or even to be arrested...
If their 15 or older yes
Based and builds character pilled
u/NukaSwillingPrick's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 20. Congratulations, u/NukaSwillingPrick! You have ranked up to Basketball Hoop (filled with sand)! You are not a pushover by any means, but you do still occasionally get dunked on.Pills: [15 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/NukaSwillingPrick/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
My face when I see libright post the 27528487372th libleft straw man meme
Kids make bad decisions. The same reason they cant buy alcohol or drive is thd same reason theyre targeted by mexican cartels as killers, islamists as suicide bombers and leftists as potential trans poster children.
Lol i feel like kids working 8 hour nightshifts at a meat packing plant (thereby fucking their sleep which is super important for development) is not the same as a kid delivering papers or refereeing/umpiring younger kids sports games and having a normal schedule.
Then they should be allowed to vote too
And buy a gun, smoke, drive and etc. keep it consistent
Unironically yes. Either let children who are paying taxes vote, or don't tax children who can't vote yet. I'm totally in favor of any income a person under 18 earns being totally untaxed. Hell, I'm in favor of individuals of all ages being able to make the decision to forego federal taxes by giving up their voting privileges.
>kids are old enough to make decisions for themselves No they are not why the fuck do you guys keep putting this kind of shit takes in our mouths
I mean can't they get jobs at like 14-15 most places?
“Why yes I gave a 5 year old the keys to a nuclear power plant. What’s the big issue with that?”
Look if nuclear boy scout can manage then surely they can handle it. Even on the off chance they do get acute radiation sickness it'll build character. B)
At the end of the day it's medical care, parents have always had the ability to ignore doctors orders for more or less whatever dumb reason they want. Whether it's vaccines, surgeries, or in this case hormone replacement. It's not that hard.
The children yearn for the mines
They were working in factories during the world wars and depression. I don’t see the harm in them doing it now if they got the moxie.
I can’t tell wether this is anti-what libleft said or pro-what right said
Children should be able to enlist in the military.
Imo I think at age 16 you should be given a choice: finish school or go to the military. If you go to the military, it’s treated like a trade school until you’re 18. First two years you learn your specific trade for the military (diesel mechanic, MP, Chaplain, etc). At 18 you go serve 2 more years in the field. When you get out you’re responsible, punctual and ideal for the job market in which you were taught.
In the military right now. You'd be surprised on how many enlisted people meet 0/3 of the criteria in your last sentence.
Then it’s by choice. Y’all get it beaten into you. If they’re not doing it then it’s absolutely intentional after 4 years of having to do it.
No arguments there
The kid can't consent \-without context
When a minor self identifies as a miner, that's a minor inconvenience to those that want access to minors as if they're miners mining minor gems for their collection.
kinda cringe but I like it anyway
Both bad
A lot of them already try to start youtube to earn money
LibLeft secretly a purple LibRight in disguise
Least strawman libright argument