16 yo kid inside a mill

Rugged made
Treestuff
Shop deals on ebay
Wesspur
Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
scut207 said:
that answered nothing. he threw the first stone.

now again:

Is riding in a car, or as he stated, walking on a sidewalk, statistically as dangerous as operating machinery in a sawmill?
yes or no?
Click to expand...
Well a dead body does not care about a statistic and neither does the dead body's loved ones.

Here is a statistic for you to look up. How many sawmill workers are killed working in a sawmill versus outside of one.
 
JRM said:
If the number of teenagers that work in a saw mill equaled the number of teenagers that drive this would be a relevant question.
Click to expand...
You are making my point for me!
We used to have extensive driver's education classes in high school, and we USED to have parents, police and judges that would enforce the traffic laws to keep motorists and pedestrians safe.
I still believe that if one wants to show concern for the teenagers that are dying or being maimed, the highways and not the sawmills are a vastly more fertile ground to plow.


Mike
 
rms61moparman said:
You are making my point for me!
We used to have extensive driver's education classes in high school, and we USED to have parents, police and judges that would enforce the traffic laws to keep motorists and pedestrians safe.
I still believe that if one wants to show concern for the teenagers that are dying or being maimed, the highways and not the sawmills are a vastly more fertile ground to plow.


Mike
Click to expand...
Why do we give criminal aliens driver's licenses, some of whom don't understand a lick of English?
 
One thing is certain, everyone is going to die. Another thing is far less people die while at work then they are not at work.
 
scut207 said:
There are jobs in Ag americans will not do.

Large business models have pretty much killed the family farm. There’s very little appeal for young people to work their arses off if there’s no hope of eventual ownership, which is how much of this labor occurred in the past.

It’s modern Serfdom. The domestic labor market is telling big business: you’ve had your heyday, laws you paid for bankrupted my parents or grandparents, you own everything, you don’t pay enough, what now?

However these are jobs that migrants will do.

We have archaic laws in how we treat or legalize temporary migrant labor. There needs to be accountability of people using our roads. People are working as best they can, given the arrangement. Politicians are very leery of any change in migrant labor law, because many of their constituents lack any sort of nuance.

There’s no shortage of racist morons who think anything short of hermetically sealing the border is going to ruin our country. This same group ironically complains about grocery costs skyrocketing when laws are enacted, that they support, negatively affect the supply of migrant labor. This same group is not well known for their problem solving ability, They are angry and loud.

Now back to whether or not Bill believes whether or not the per capita risk involved in an industry to compare danger of employment requires being involved in that industry or not.
Click to expand...
I inhireted my parents homestead/farm. I'll be working in the heat all day.

No criminal aliens helping me.......
 
Bill G said:
Sir,
What real-life experience do you have in the subject? Just today (Tuesday) I witnessed a well trained, well educated adult nearly severely injure an employee. That is the second time in a year the same well educated, well trained employee has done so. Today (Tuesday) he almost got me but I saw it coming. and dodged it. The young man behind me could not see it coming and he damn near felt the brunt.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the response, but it's not relevant to my comment.

Summarized, I said that the risk per hour of working in a sawmill is (much) higher than the risk per hour of teen driving. In terms of necessity, many teens legitimately need to drive for various good reasons. No teen needs to work in a sawmill. The two cases are not comparable.

rms61moparman said:
Any assertion that one activity that can cause injury or death is more dangerous than another is asinine! Dead is dead! A missing limb from one activity is just as gone as if from any other activity. Anyone disagreeing with that statement is simply a fool or purposely being contrary.


Mike
Click to expand...

Dead is dead, but of course there are differences in the risk level of various occupations and activities. Denying that is ridiculous. There are differences in the need and necessity for involvement in risky activities. Driving has a much lower risk factor than working in a sawmill. It's not necessary to be a professional driver or a sawyer to understand that.

For example: "The National Traumatic Occupational Fatalities (NTOF) Surveillance System indicates that during the period 1980-89, nearly 6,400 U.S. workers died each year from traumatic injuries suffered in the workplace [NIOSH 1993a]. Over this 10-year period, an estimated 1,492 of these deaths occurred in the logging industry, where the average annual fatality rate is more than 23 times that for all U.S. workers (164 deaths per 100,000 workers compared with 7 per 100,000). Most of these logging deaths occurred in four occupational groups: logging occupations (for example, fellers, limbers, buckers, and choker setters), truck drivers, general laborers, and material machine operators."

Logging is not running a sawmill. But clearly that occupation has a MUCH higher risk than most other occupations. The argument that "dead is dead" is nonsense and does not refute the fact that there are differences of exposure to risk in different occupations.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/95-101/default.html#:~:text=Fatality Rates&text=Over this 10-year period,compared with 7 per 100,000).
 
ColoCoug said:
I appreciate the response, but it's not relevant to my comment.

Summarized, I said that the risk per hour of working in a sawmill is (much) higher than the risk per hour of teen driving. In terms of necessity, many teens legitimately need to drive for various good reasons. No teen needs to work in a sawmill. The two cases are not comparable.



Dead is dead, but of course there are differences in the risk level of various occupations and activities. Denying that is ridiculous. There are differences in the need and necessity for involvement in risky activities. Driving has a much lower risk factor than working in a sawmill. It's not necessary to be a professional driver or a sawyer to understand that.

For example: "The National Traumatic Occupational Fatalities (NTOF) Surveillance System indicates that during the period 1980-89, nearly 6,400 U.S. workers died each year from traumatic injuries suffered in the workplace [NIOSH 1993a]. Over this 10-year period, an estimated 1,492 of these deaths occurred in the logging industry, where the average annual fatality rate is more than 23 times that for all U.S. workers (164 deaths per 100,000 workers compared with 7 per 100,000). Most of these logging deaths occurred in four occupational groups: logging occupations (for example, fellers, limbers, buckers, and choker setters), truck drivers, general laborers, and material machine operators."

Logging is not running a sawmill. But clearly that occupation has a MUCH higher risk than most other occupations. The argument that "dead is dead" is nonsense and does not refute the fact that there are differences of exposure to risk in different occupations.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/95-101/default.html#:~:text=Fatality Rates&text=Over this 10-year period,compared with 7 per 100,000).
Click to expand...

dude I tried, they're staring down at us from the peak of the bell curve.
 
scut207 said:
dude I tried, they're staring down at us from the peak of the bell curve.
Click to expand...
I get that young men and women of many ages have done heavy and dangerous work throughout history. That doesn't mean that it's necessary or appropriate now.
 
rms61moparman said:
You are making my point for me!
Click to expand...

I'm not attempting to make any point with the exception that you can not accurately compare fatalities in those two categories death for death. I have not argued for or against kids in the work force as it needs to be case by case, not everyone lumped together.


rms61moparman said:
We used to have extensive driver's education classes in high school, and we USED to have parents, police and judges that would enforce the traffic laws to keep motorists and pedestrians safe.
Click to expand...

Fatalities related to teenage drivers, passengers, and pedestrians are much lower today than they were in the 70's, despite there being significantly more drivers on the road today. Much of this is due to safety improvements.
 
wildwes said:
The avenues for obtaining a NC teaching license are more or less the same regardless of subject. It isn't that hard to do to be honest.
Click to expand...
To become certified in a vocational area here is extremely different than a core subject. The state recognizes those with actual real life hands on experience in the area in which they teach. I will explain more later
 
Bill G said:
To become certified in a vocational area here is extremely different than a cord subject. The state recognizes those with actual real life hands on experience in the area in which they teach. I will explain more later
Click to expand...

There are things here that make it a little easier, but not much. Now pay is a different matter- lateral entry teachers can be paid for qualified work experience in some cases, which puts them making more than many classroom teachers who don't have a few decades of experience. Even so, they pay is usually less than what industry pays.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top