"Tough on crime" for the sake of winning elections is an absolute joke. Their solutions are detrimental and often lead to shifty practices like changing the way crimes are reported. Businesses in our downtown area are angry about having zero police presence. If five businesses are victimized in the same 24 hour period, it gets counted as a single crime. (For some reason "defund the police" caused a huge drop in the number of officers. Now they can't get enough applicants to fill the open positions.) Hell, they stopped prosecuting for theft of items valued under $750. For some reason, the business owners still felt like victims.

My only point in this reply is to agree that "tough on crime" as a policy is stupid. We need actual solutions to improve safety and prevent creating huge numbers of victims. Unfortunately, it's a very tough problem to solve.

You're the only one lying here bud. I re-posted with the correct article. Nothing was fake. You're constant claims without anything to back them off looks pretty childish. Just admit you made an incorrect claim (like an adult), and get on with your day. Don't double down on something provably incorrect.

He should close it, but he won't. He's his own type of corrupt. My point was that his administration had nothing to do with starting the process of buying customer data from airlines. That was the previous administration. Your response to the article was to blame Trump. He can be blamed for tons of shit, just not this, unless he allows it to continue. If that happens, he's just as much to blame as the brain-dead guy before him.

So you read a summary, and blame Trump. Then you find out this action started during a different administration, so you blame piece of shit that started the DHS? You do understand that each presidential administration appoints people to run those departments, right? Shouldn't one of the administrations after Bush changed or eliminated the department?

That's why you have to read the link. Such actions would help you not look more foolish than the clown who posted an incorrect link

Cool story, but nothing to back up your claim that "TheStreet" doesn't exist.

correct link

Stupid mistake on my part.

Correct article

You lack proper reasoning skills. Posting the wrong link makes me a moron, not a liar.

It didn't start this year. Stop becoming a meme. No one in government in any party in this country care about you or your privacy.

You didn't read those, did you? The one in Florida was to remove some restrictions for 16 & 17 year olds. I agree that the person who filed it seems to have done so in bad faith. Stating that removing some employment restrictions because the kid's parents "know best" is a green light for abuse by employers. However, the bill failed in the senate.

The West Virginia bill which will likely become law soon is to apply the same standards to 14 & 15 year old employment as is available in many states already. It does not remove a prohibition on total work hours allowed at that age or the type of work allowed. It just removes the "work permit" process. The work permit was formality that helped nothing. Federal law still exists and is not violated. My daughter is 14 and works 5 hours a week at an ice cream shop. It's been allowed in my state without a permit as long as I can remember. I myself worked in a pet store at that age.

I will fully agree that the Florida bill got too close to passage. Thankfully the Florida state senate killed it, but that doesn't mean it can't be abused in the future since 16 & 17 year olds have fewer federal protections than 14 & 15 year olds do. Federal law still prevents the hazardous employment for minors, and that won't change. Any state that passes such laws will be challenged in federal court. That would be terrible optics for the folks responsible.

I'll help you with that one. The main subject of the story was hired (as a 16 year old) to do hazardous work in violation of the law. He didn't do the work because laws allowed him to. The hiring company broke the law and had numerous other employment violations. Sounds like a company that needs to be shut down, but it isn't a trend.

Additionally, the article continuously mentions that "states have introduced legislation to weaken child protective labor laws". The closest it gets to mentioning any laws passed is this non-sense:

That's a half-assed nonsense statement if I've ever seen one. Why don't they bother to list any of these passed laws? Why do they have to say that a "left-leaning think-tank" stated the information instead of doing their own research and posting it?

The trick they exploit in this article is stating the number of "states" that have introduced legislation. States don't introduce legislation, legislators introduce legislation. Politicians are bought and paid for scum in most cases regardless of party. These politicians are likely representing the interests of businesses that fund their campaigns (and hire a lot of people in their districts). Since the article is not heavy on proof (and I have no interest in looking up the nonsense all state legislatures are working on), you can only assume most of that legislation will be killed. For some reason the politicians that aren't paid off by "Child Labor Inc" don't want to have to explain why they weakened child labor laws during their next campaign.

The legislators that introduce this nonsense need to be identified and voted out of office. Child labor (especially in hazardous labor environments) needs to be reported immediately and the companies that exploit the children need to be closed with long jail sentences for the perpetrators. Thankfully there aren't more stories like the one you posted. Watch your state representatives closely and let them know when they're being watched. They hate that kind of attention... trust me on that one!

All the illegal whaling would stop. Isn't that a benefit?

I suggest an aluminum foil codpiece...

I wouldn't exactly trust DuckDuckGo either. I still use the Fox Fire, but there are better options out there.

Exactly. I'd also add that doing proper validations is also hard for "generic business person" to understand, much less ask for.