It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

More Govt. Overreach! Rural kids, parents angry about Labor Dept. rule banning farm chores

page: 4
35
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 


If the supposed "Fact 2 through 5" are true completely and not misleading, than you are correct in the assertion that this specific change to this specific facet is minimal and essentially serving to act as a distraction to real issues that plague the agricultural industry.

So really it looks like more of a move to protect the legal liability of large corporations in the event of injuries in the field (quite common actually).

It does state outright that this 'change' does not affect LLC small farms worked by families.

I hope your information is correct because although I completely disregard your pro-Obama stance I attempt to read in between the lines past people's petty political leanings to find that gray zone where the truth most likely resides.


What we should be focusing on are finding ways to protect small LLC farmers from mega-corporations and their armies of attorneys.

I don't believe this thread is subject to "fear mongering" per se but instead basic misunderstandings, mis-communication, etc which result in overall disinformation, confusion, and dismay.

Taking an outright and outspoken pro-Obama stance when attempting to find the truth about information pertaining the current Executive Administration in the USA harms your credibility with those whom will disregard your statements the most in the first place. By coming at a neutral perspective and avoiding right vs left political bias you can convince other less open minded people most likely. Just a few observations.

However, all of this rests on the validity and veracity of the information you have linked. If that information is misleading either by accident or by design, than this all crumbles apart.




posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 
Yeah, I get that. I'm not addressing the wrongness of exemptions and allowances. I'm addressing the lie that is being promoted in this thread regarding the family farm and child labor.

They are working up peoples sentiments based on the lie.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoAngel2u
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 
Yeah, I get that. I'm not addressing the wrongness of exemptions and allowances. I'm addressing the lie that is being promoted in this thread regarding the family farm and child labor.

They are working up peoples sentiments based on the lie.



They are one in the same. By granting exemptions they have necessarily made parents and children libel to this code, as they have done by allowing. What can be exempted can be unexempted, and what can be allowed can be disallowed. People have good cause to be alarmed.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 


If the supposed "Fact 2 through 5" are true completely and not misleading, than you are correct in the assertion that this specific change to this specific facet is minimal and essentially serving to act as a distraction to real issues that plague the agricultural industry.

So really it looks like more of a move to protect the legal liability of large corporations in the event of injuries in the field (quite common actually).

It does state outright that this 'change' does not affect LLC small farms worked by families.

I hope your information is correct because although I completely disregard your pro-Obama stance I attempt to read in between the lines past people's petty political leanings to find that gray zone where the truth most likely resides.


What we should be focusing on are finding ways to protect small LLC farmers from mega-corporations and their armies of attorneys.

I don't believe this thread is subject to "fear mongering" per se but instead basic misunderstandings, mis-communication, etc which result in overall disinformation, confusion, and dismay.

Taking an outright and outspoken pro-Obama stance when attempting to find the truth about information pertaining the current Executive Administration in the USA harms your credibility with those whom will disregard your statements the most in the first place. By coming at a neutral perspective and avoiding right vs left political bias you can convince other less open minded people most likely. Just a few observations.

However, all of this rests on the validity and veracity of the information you have linked. If that information is misleading either by accident or by design, than this all crumbles apart.

Well, my stance is not pro-Obama, in fact I'm not pro-Obama, I'm pro-truth, regardless of who is getting credit. If it harms my credibility, then so be it. I never tooted Obama's stance on anything. Merely criticized the honesty of the reporting.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 
The source that I provided is the US Dept of Labor website. But you would know that if you did indeed check them out, eh? This whole subject crumbled with the opening post that was full of lies and outrage over lies.

Go figure.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoAngel2u
reply to post by muzzleflash
 
The source that I provided is the US Dept of Labor website. But you would know that if you did indeed check them out, eh? This whole subject crumbled with the opening post that was full of lies and outrage over lies.

Go figure.



I let your posturing on "truth" go with the post above this one, but enough is enough. You cannot dismiss the words exemption and allow and their clear legal meaning just so you can claim that this code does not affect farmers with children. Incrementation is how the government (either party, left or right as muzzle pointed out) aggregates power. If you're so interested in truth, then let's not pretend that government doesn't incrementally expand their power base.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by NoAngel2u
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 
Yeah, I get that. I'm not addressing the wrongness of exemptions and allowances. I'm addressing the lie that is being promoted in this thread regarding the family farm and child labor.

They are working up peoples sentiments based on the lie.



They are one in the same. By granting exemptions they have necessarily made parents and children libel to this code, as they have done by allowing. What can be exempted can be unexempted, and what can be allowed can be disallowed. People have good cause to be alarmed.

Has the exempted been unexempted? Has the allowed been disallowed? In the context of this subject, of course. No, so there is no reason to be alarmed that children will not be allowed to do farming chores this coming summer when the updating child labor laws take effect.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 


Oh yes I have now taken a close look at this source website "The Daily Caller". Wow.


This crap is the hard core right wing fanaticism, the exact same people as the democrats except they wear red instead of blue. Totally bias and untrustworthy news source, mostly all baseless opinions (right vs left nonsense).

I was looking at each headline and story, and thinking "this is so irrelevant in reality of governing a nation, and is all sensationalist propaganda just like from FOX, CNN, NBC, BBC, every other major news outlet to ever exist," etc.

Then I saw Ann Coulter on there. No wonder they are taking everything out of context. They are so dirty and in bed with the left wing on colluding to distract the public with minor nuances and novelties in order to pull off their really big schemes without anyone noticing.

I trust Ann Coulter and her "colleagues" as much as I trust the pro-Obama crowd. Zilch, nil.

Forgive me for my skeptical nature and incessant determination to avoid putting confidence in anything either party attempts to convince me of.

It's just when I catch someone (or group) lying to me, I can't help but question if anything they say from then on is also a lie. Losing trust can be traumatic and last a long time, and rebuilding that trust will require some form of redress of which is certainly not being addressed. A liar must rectify or remedy their tarnished reputation and make efforts to amend themselves.

Confidence ratings are at all time lows. Especially mine.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoAngel2u

Well, my stance is not pro-Obama, in fact I'm not pro-Obama, I'm pro-truth, regardless of who is getting credit. If it harms my credibility, then so be it. I never tooted Obama's stance on anything. Merely criticized the honesty of the reporting.


Your clarification is noted and I thank you for alerting me to what was going on here.

The website source is clearly not credible. Just look at it.
Thanks for the heads up.

I am not pro-Obama either but I think you are right this is misinformation coming from the Daily Caller.
***Very high possibility****

I said I get really suspicious of liars in the post above right? Well Coulter is a huge compulsive liar and very heartless typically in her ethics. If you check out her wiki you will find out some really interesting facts about her that most people don't know.
edit on 26-4-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 





Has the exempted been unexempted? Has the allowed been disallowed? In the context of this subject, of course. No, so there is no reason to be alarmed that children will not be allowed to do farming chores this coming summer when the updating child labor laws take effect.


And how loudly will your indifferent silence scream once they have been unexempted and disallowed? Here's the deal; These farmers do not have to and should not grant jurisdiction to this bogus code. By not granting any jurisdiction, they need no exemption or allowance. Your pretense of a benign code is nothing more than disingenuousness while you preen and pose as some guardian of truth.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by NoAngel2u
reply to post by muzzleflash
 
The source that I provided is the US Dept of Labor website. But you would know that if you did indeed check them out, eh? This whole subject crumbled with the opening post that was full of lies and outrage over lies.

Go figure.



I let your posturing on "truth" go with the post above this one, but enough is enough. You cannot dismiss the words exemption and allow and their clear legal meaning just so you can claim that this code does not affect farmers with children. Incrementation is how the government (either party, left or right as muzzle pointed out) aggregates power. If you're so interested in truth, then let's not pretend that government doesn't incrementally expand their power base.

lol Ohhhh? So you are you disallowing and unexempting me now? lmao My stance on whether the rules being put in place this summer regarding kids working on family farms does not mean that I am unaware that the gov is a kreeping kudzu vine. OK? The point is the parental exemption is statutory and will not be affected by the updates.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
After researching this I realize why this was done. This is all about the Unions, it's about removing kids from the work force to benefit the Unions. This was done for votes. Sometimes you have to dig, but it's always about money or power. Follow the money. This time it's part of the Obama reelection campaign once again.

Of course this will harm the poor the most and will drive the cost of food up even higher. But then, since when did ideological progressives ever care about the poor. They only pretend to for votes. Their policies always hurt the poor the worst. Sad the poor don't seem to get that. That realization played a huge part in digging myself out of poverty.

I knew I was missing something yesterday.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 


The point is you're dismissing peoples genuine concerns and expecting them to accept your dishonest portrayal of legislation, and then amusingly keep making posts as if you've "settled" the issue, and then even more amusingly you attempt to frame me as some tyrant. While I don't see you as a tyrant, you can be rest assured I have nothing but bad taste in my mouth for the sycophants of tyranny.

Only stupid people will buy into your sophistry. While I made the point that Baum was most likely comparing the American farmer to the Scarecrow (if I only had a brain) in the Wizard of Oz, that comparison comes with an ending where Oz insists that the Scarecrow always had a brain,and indeed, the American farmer can see right through your bogus pretense.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 





Has the exempted been unexempted? Has the allowed been disallowed? In the context of this subject, of course. No, so there is no reason to be alarmed that children will not be allowed to do farming chores this coming summer when the updating child labor laws take effect.


And how loudly will your indifferent silence scream once they have been unexempted and disallowed? Here's the deal; These farmers do not have to and should not grant jurisdiction to this bogus code. By not granting any jurisdiction, they need no exemption or allowance. Your pretense of a benign code is nothing more than disingenuousness while you preen and pose as some guardian of truth.



Well, very likely louder that my annoyed scream at your highbrowsing attitude lol BUT, because nothing changed and all the little farm kiddies can still work their asses off for mom and dad.


I get your point, but the majority of people don't and consider themselves bound by these codes to one degree or another. I'm merely speaking to them within that frame work.

It is of no concern to me that you consider me disingenuous, btw. lol



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Sounds like O-bummer's Labour dept wants to encourage people to grow up incapable of learning the basics of life,how to do real work,and sustain oneself.What could be better for kids than to learn from a young age,how to do things like farmwork,growing one own food,etc? Be capable people,who are not afraid to pitch in+do things with their hands aside from pressing the remote buttons.No-one should be forced to do free slave labour,but its always been a way of life,for farmer families to have their kids pitch in and work..its also a practical and wholesome way of life.A good way to practise for SHTF,to have your kids have a set of skills.

This is just another example of government sticking their noses into something thats worked out well for thousands of years,and buggering it up.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 





I get your point, but the majority of people don't and consider themselves bound by these codes to one degree or another. I'm merely speaking to them within that frame work.


You're assuming the majority do not get my point. However, both hawkieye and myself had all ready made that point long before you jumped in to distract people from that point and point right back to the legislation - exemptions and allowances all.

By "speaking to them in that framework" you've argued that they should accept the legislation. This is not good advice, regardless of how stupid you may think people are in terms of advice.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 


The point is you're dismissing peoples genuine concerns and expecting them to accept your dishonest portrayal of legislation, and then amusingly keep making posts as if you've "settled" the issue, and then even more amusingly you attempt to frame me as some tyrant. While I don't see you as a tyrant, you can be rest assured I have nothing but bad taste in my mouth for the sycophants of tyranny.

Only stupid people will buy into your sophistry. While I made the point that Baum was most likely comparing the American farmer to the Scarecrow (if I only had a brain) in the Wizard of Oz, that comparison comes with an ending where Oz insists that the Scarecrow always had a brain,and indeed, the American farmer can see right through your bogus pretense.



First off, I'm not dismissing genuine concerns, otherwise I would have not bothered. I was concerned when I read the thread title, and as I continued reading comments. Then I check the information myself and thought I'd share what I found out.

The topic of this thread is the labor dept rules banning children from doing farm chores. That is in fact a lie. They do not do that.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 





The topic of this thread is the labor dept rules banning children from doing farm chores. That is in fact a lie. They do not do that.


It may be a bit hyperbolic but it is not a lie and you proved that yourself when you posted the portion of the legislation that granted exemptions and allowances. Those exemptions are from the ban, and the allowances are in regards to the ban. I have stated this all ready but it bears repeating; people have good cause to be alarmed.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 





The topic of this thread is the labor dept rules banning children from doing farm chores. That is in fact a lie. They do not do that.


It may be a bit hyperbolic but it is not a lie and you proved that yourself when you posted the portion of the legislation that granted exemptions and allowances. Those exemptions are from the ban, and the allowances are in regards to the ban. I have stated this all ready but it bears repeating; people have good cause to be alarmed.




So parents with farms and children were once subject to the rules that apply within employee/employer relationship? When were they subject to those rules, and when did that change?

People do not need to be concerned that the rules coming this summer will disallow children from working on their family farms, because they won't.
edit on 4/26/1212 by NoAngel2u because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by NoAngel2u
 



Stop playing your games of disingenuous tripe! The moment the labor department exempts these people, they necessarily become subject to the damned legislation, unless they challenge the jurisdiction. You're the one that posted the exemption and allowances clause, either you truly do understand what that means, or you don't. If you understand what it means then you've been lying in this thread. If you don't understand it then you're in way over your head.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join