Imagine living in a place where you struggle to keep a roof over your head and food in your fridge. Under these circumstances, there is no choice but to let everyone in your household find a job. This is unfortunately the reality of poorer countries. We are so blinded by our privileges and opportunities available to us in our country that we cannot see what other unfortunate people are facing. Many people feel that the U.S. shouldn’t impose laws to prohibit goods made by children because this would eventually cause them to be homeless and foodless. However, others believe that they are too young to work and should be in school instead. Divakaruni’s claim makes sense because children would have nowhere to go and nothing to eat due to having
…show more content…
For example, Divakaruni makes a bold statement, “A bill like the one we just passed is of no use unless it goes hand in hand with programs that will offer a new life to these newly released children.” This emphasizes that until we have ways to offer new lives for these kids, we shouldn 't interfere with their business. For all we know, we can inflict more harm to them than good. If we were to release these children as of right now, they would have nowhere to go. Most of them were abandoned by their parents due to not having enough money to take care of them. In addition, Divakaruni states that “It is easy for us in America to make the error of evaluating situations in the rest of the world as though they were happening in this country and propose solutions that makes excellent sense in the context of our society.” This statement shows that the people of America know how to propose solutions as if they were America’s problems. However, most of the time, these solutions will not work in other countries. We do not see beyond the problems they are facing. In order to come up with solutions that will work, we will need to see from their perspective. On the other hand, Divakaruni also claims, “They could be free and happy, like American Children.” Although it is true that the children would be free, there is no doubt …show more content…
To illustrate this idea, Fisher says, “Wages are often so low that hungry parents have little choice but to send their children to get jobs.” If the U.S. were to ban the goods made by children, the company they are working for would go bankrupt, which would lead to even lower wages. This will lead to more child labors because the families would need more income in order to be able to have food on the table. Additionally, Fisher states that “Practices like child labor are actually a net loss for the economy.” This shows that the people of the poorer countries aren’t giving the children the job because they are cheap and easy to maintain, but rather because their families need the money. Critics are lead to believe that the companies using children are abusing them and treating them inhumanely, but that is not the case. I believe we can leave the matter about child labor alone until we can propose a solution for the children after they are banned from their workplaces. On the other hand, while Fisher addresses the other side of the debate, he quotes, “Children as young as 11 years of age work full time.” This is one hundred percent true, but children working could be a learning opportunity too. Children work because their
For example, Divakaruni makes a bold statement, “A bill like the one we just passed is of no use unless it goes hand in hand with programs that will offer a new life to these newly released children.” This emphasizes that until we have ways to offer new lives for these kids, we shouldn 't interfere with their business. For all we know, we can inflict more harm to them than good. If we were to release these children as of right now, they would have nowhere to go. Most of them were abandoned by their parents due to not having enough money to take care of them. In addition, Divakaruni states that “It is easy for us in America to make the error of evaluating situations in the rest of the world as though they were happening in this country and propose solutions that makes excellent sense in the context of our society.” This statement shows that the people of America know how to propose solutions as if they were America’s problems. However, most of the time, these solutions will not work in other countries. We do not see beyond the problems they are facing. In order to come up with solutions that will work, we will need to see from their perspective. On the other hand, Divakaruni also claims, “They could be free and happy, like American Children.” Although it is true that the children would be free, there is no doubt …show more content…
To illustrate this idea, Fisher says, “Wages are often so low that hungry parents have little choice but to send their children to get jobs.” If the U.S. were to ban the goods made by children, the company they are working for would go bankrupt, which would lead to even lower wages. This will lead to more child labors because the families would need more income in order to be able to have food on the table. Additionally, Fisher states that “Practices like child labor are actually a net loss for the economy.” This shows that the people of the poorer countries aren’t giving the children the job because they are cheap and easy to maintain, but rather because their families need the money. Critics are lead to believe that the companies using children are abusing them and treating them inhumanely, but that is not the case. I believe we can leave the matter about child labor alone until we can propose a solution for the children after they are banned from their workplaces. On the other hand, while Fisher addresses the other side of the debate, he quotes, “Children as young as 11 years of age work full time.” This is one hundred percent true, but children working could be a learning opportunity too. Children work because their