Smug liberals decide to "protect" third world families from child labor.

The New York Times ^ | July 13, 2002 | JUAN FORERO

[grundle]

This is a brief excerpt from an article from The New York Times. A bunch of liberal "do gooders" decided that they wanted to "help" families in Ecuador by protesting against child labor. In response to the prostetors, the children were fired. So now the "do gooders" are smug with the knowledge that they have "helped" the children.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/13/international/americas/13ECUA.html

July 13, 2002

In Ecuador's Banana Fields, Child Labor Is Key to Profits

By JUAN FORERO

But while rights activists regard such labor as unacceptable, many parents like Mr. and Mrs. Menéndez see it as a necessity.

When several plantations, fearing unwanted attention, dismissed their child workers after a damning 114-page report in April by Human Rights Watch, the action was taken as a disaster by families across the lush banana belt of southern Ecuador — the world's largest banana exporter and an increasingly important source for American corporations like Dole and Del Monte, according to the report.

"They fired all the children, but the work they did helped us," complained María Narváez, 31, whose two sons, Néstor and Luis Boa, 12 and 13, were dismissed from a big hacienda where they earned $3 a day. "The situation is such that we all have to pitch in."

[JimSEA]

By saving children from the evils of capitalism they starve them. Real bright but as these folks are largely the shills of organized labor, they really don't give a damn.

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

I'm certainly not in favor of child labor, but for most of the history of humankind children worked in the fields along side their parents. That or starve.

[spqrzilla9]

The reality is that child labor ended in nations that grew wealthy first, then those nations could afford to ban the practice. People who get the order of things backwards are doing great harm.

[Blood of Tyrants]

In the liberal's fantasy world it is better for a child to starve than to have to work. It is better for a child to be raped and murdered than to condemn homosexual pedophiles. It is better for a woman to be raped and strangled to death with her pantyhose than to carry a gun to defend herself.

[PoisedWoman]

I'll never forget my trip through a bamboo furniture factory in the southern Philippines. Boys worked AND lived in the factory, they were healthy, had some money, were safe from the horrible alternative of living on the squalid streets, and were happy and friendly to visitors. We saw the entire factory, not just model workshop.

. The libs would like to protect them by taking away their jobs? Nasty. Very nasty.

Meanwhile, in Cuba, a tour of a cigar factory, a model one set up for tourists, revealed the most unhappy downtrodden workers you ever saw, each one whispering to passing tourists, asking for a handout. They were adult workers, reduced to acting like helpless children. Disgusting socialismo at work.

[toddst]

In the liberal's fantasy world it is better for a child to starve than to have to work. It is better for a child to be raped and murdered than to condemn homosexual pedophiles. It is better for a woman to be raped and strangled to death with her pantyhose than to carry a gun to defend herself.

10-4. Those liberals don't get out much, do they? Probably never been hungry either, or felt threatened. What a sorry lot!

[PoisedWoman]

Bump because I like this topic.