The main law regulating child labor in the United States is the Fair Labor Standards Act. For non-agricultural jobs, children under 14 may not be employed, children between 14 and 16 may be employed in allowed occupations during limited hours, and children between 16 and 18 may be employed for unlimited hours in non-hazardous occupations.[1] A number of exceptions to these rules exist, such as for employment by parents, newspaper delivery, and child actors.[1] The regulations for agricultural employment are generally less strict.
The economics of child work involves supply and demand relationships on at least three levels: the supply and demand of labor on the national (and international) level; the supply and demand of labor at the level of the firm or enterprise; the supply and demand for labor (and other functions) in the family. But a complete picture of the economics of child labor cannot be limited to simply determining supply and demand functions, because the political economy of child labor varies significantly from what a simple formal model might predict. Suppose a country could effectively outlaw child labor. Three consequences would follow: (1) the families (and the economy) would lose the income generated by their children; (2) the supply of labor would fall, driving up wages for adult workers; and (3) the opportunity cost of a child’s working time would shrink, making staying in school (assuming schools were available) much more attractive. In principle, a virtuous circle would follow: with more schooling, the children would get more skills and become more productive adults, raising wages and family welfare.20 To the extent that the demand for labor is elastic, however, the increase in wages implies that the total number of jobs would fall.
The labor supply effects are the basic outline of the logic that underlies almost all nations’ laws against child labor, as well as the international minimum age standard set in ILO Convention 138 and much of the anti-child labor statements during the recent protests against the World Trade Organization, World Bank and International Monetary Fund. This model does describe in very simplified form the long-term history of child work in the economic development of developed economies. But in the short-term, the virtuous circle seldom occurs in real life as quickly as the simple, static model suggests. The reason for the model’s short-term failure is that child work results from a complex interweaving of need, tradition, culture, family dynamics and the availability of alternative activities for children.
History suggests that children tend to work less, and go to school more, as a result of several related economic and social trends. the political economy of a place plays at least as big a part as per capita income in determining the level of child labor there.
That would be a sect, for edg2020
hope this helps ^^
Effects of World War I:
Russia - Becomes the world's first Communist state, leading to a civil war which kills millions. Later on, becomes the main opponent to Nazi Germany, and then the US during the Cold War.
Germany - Strong sense of Nationalism begins, after what is seen as an unfair settlement (especially the crushing reparation payments). Becomes increasingly right-wing, as a reaction to the Socialists who signed the Treaty of Versailles. This all would culminate to start World War II.
France - Bitter rivalry with Germany continues; builds the Maginot Line which basically destroys from 'elan' (offensive spirirt). An entire generation of men killed; desire to avoid a war at any cost results in the harsh Treaty of Versailles which causes the opposite. Maintains a strong army following World War I.
Britain - Like France, Britain loses almost an entire generation of men. Resolved to impose harsh conditions on Germany, but realised that this would only result in war later on. Negative public reactions to war mean massive cuts in military expenditure, meaning that Britain is unprepared for World War II.
USA - Massive economic boom due to military production results in a 'Golden Age' with massive investment into companies. Eventually the bubble bursts, causing a massive worldwide economic depression; this leads to Hitler's rise to power.
Italy - Gains little for it's contribution to the war, and is left with a strong desire for colonies in Africa. Strong anti-Communist feelings make Mussolini's rise to power relatively easy. His future alliance with Hitler provides the basis of the Axis.
Japan - Joined the Allies, but recieves little in the way of German Pacific colonies. Expansionist government soon comes to power, leading it to align itself with the Axis and open up the Pacific front of World War II.
British Commonwealth - Australia and New Zealand finally have their own 'national spirit' following the landings at Gallipoli; the 'Colonial' troops prove to be far better fighters than British conscripts. This increasing independence from Britain is of little consequence until World War II, when America becomes the new world leader.
World War I ended suddenly, but the 25 year peace that followed was basically an interlude till World War II in which technology advanced further, allowing for more bloodshed.
Answer:
Ww1 and industrial phase
Explanation:
The Result of Imperialism. In the late 1800's and early 1900's countries in Europe went through an industrial phase and required more and more resources. ... Imperialism introduced these lands to new knowledge and technology, but also brought its peoples under rule. The result of imperialism is World War I.
