Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, August 10, 2011
Politics Confidential to Megyn Kelly
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:11 AM
It's true, Megyn! The United States is "the only advanced country that doesn’t require paid leave" for new parents. We're also the only advanced country in the world that doesn't provide health care coverage for all its citizens. Maybe if your "nice employer" didn't spend so much airtime stoking xenophobia and condemning that evil socialism stuff they've got over there in Yurp and up there in Canadia then, gee, maybe our country could join every other advanced country in the world in providing its citizens with health care, paid maternity leave, four weeks of paid vacation per year, etc.
Sigh.
Conservatives with gay children are for marriage equality, conservatives with relatives who have alzheimer's disease are for stem-cell research, conservatives with drug problems are for drug-treatment programs over incarceration, and now conservatives with new babies are for paid maternity leave. Wouldn't it be wonderful if conservatives could see the value of a particular social program without first having the need for it touch them in some personal way? When will conservatives make the empathy leap? Is it really that hard for a conservative to imagine having a gay child or a loved one stricken with a terminal illness or a drug problem or a baby? (Via Sullivan.)
1
this lack of empathy is an excellent point, and i speculate that it constitutes a large part of the source of (modern american) conservatism.
2
conservatives have empathy for people that are most like them, or that they aspire to be. no one else.
3
Oh, yeah, you hit the nail on the head. This is the common thread among every conservative or conservative-leaning person I know. "Everything government does is evil, wrong and wasteful, except the things that I use or have used" is their mantra, and what's worse, they actually feel that there is virtue in thinking that way.
4
I don't understand why Mr Talk Radio Shock Jock guy couldn't admit he said a dumb thing and apologize.
7
It's always fun to bring up Sweden's parental leave benefits to see how people react to them:
http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/The-S…
http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/The-S…
9
Anyone named "Megyn" should immediately be sent to the gulag. Where I'd fuck her brains out post haste, because she's a hottie. Even if she is an idiot.
10
Yes. Conservatives are incapable of thinking of people other than their tiny in-group. Shoving back against our internal in-group/out-group sorting mechanism is an inherently liberal thing to do.
What the fuck? I think I channeled Mudede there just a bit.
What the fuck? I think I channeled Mudede there just a bit.
11
Part of the way that conservative brains work is that they care about people like themselves. The pattern you notice is buried deep in the way they think. Asking them to care about people they don't know is like asking them to become liberals.
On another note, What is Fifty-Two-Eighty thinking? Megyn Kelly is not fuckable. While I agree that she would be hot if she were not possessed by Satan, that expression that is always on her face makes her unsuitable for any task that does not involve scaring small children or starting fights.
On another note, What is Fifty-Two-Eighty thinking? Megyn Kelly is not fuckable. While I agree that she would be hot if she were not possessed by Satan, that expression that is always on her face makes her unsuitable for any task that does not involve scaring small children or starting fights.
14
My sister showed me this a few months back and I found it fascinating: http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_…
A talk about the difference between liberals and conservatives.
A talk about the difference between liberals and conservatives.
15
I wondered about conservatives empathy levels (or lack thereof) during the whole healthcare debate. A guy I know was railing against it (he's got a "good" job, with healthcare) and I just kept thinking... what happens if you lose your job? And then get cancer (or one of your kids does)? Can you literally not imagine that scenario? Your wife doesn't work, so... what happens then? Bankruptcy?
Adding to my bewilderment with him was the fact that his brother-in-law's dad lost his ("good") job and healthcare in his late 50s and is basically screwed until Medicare kicks in. He had an abscessed tooth that he couldn't afford to get treated, which has the possibility or nasty side effects in older people that can, in theory, kill you (like... heart attacks). Anyways, I was like, you have an example, in your family, of the exact scenario this is trying to prevent. And you still can't put yourself in the place where you imagine this kind of coverage being good for you? You still are railing against all the no-good lazy folks who will take advantage of it?
Adding to my bewilderment with him was the fact that his brother-in-law's dad lost his ("good") job and healthcare in his late 50s and is basically screwed until Medicare kicks in. He had an abscessed tooth that he couldn't afford to get treated, which has the possibility or nasty side effects in older people that can, in theory, kill you (like... heart attacks). Anyways, I was like, you have an example, in your family, of the exact scenario this is trying to prevent. And you still can't put yourself in the place where you imagine this kind of coverage being good for you? You still are railing against all the no-good lazy folks who will take advantage of it?
16
@3 - That's because every conservative has it figured out and is living the right, virtuous life, and anyone who uses services they don't personally use is abusing a wasteful system and hasn't figured out the right, virtuous life.
18
@7 Yeah, I've seen that before and my jaw *still* drops each time.
The empathy thing is big. You see its absence in nearly everything: arguments against health care, arguments for blowing away abortion providers, and so on and so forth. Conservatives seem particularly unable to extend empathy to those Not Like Them. Liberals can have issues with this as well, but conservatives have cornered the market.
The empathy thing is big. You see its absence in nearly everything: arguments against health care, arguments for blowing away abortion providers, and so on and so forth. Conservatives seem particularly unable to extend empathy to those Not Like Them. Liberals can have issues with this as well, but conservatives have cornered the market.
19
It's right up there with the abortion-for-me-but-not-for-thee folks. Every abortion provider has stories of the pro-life woman coming in for an abortion and going right out to protest the next week. It's the "only my abortion is legitimate, everyone else is a dirty slut" syndrome.
20
There are times I'd love to help my kids with some of their problems, take the problem from them with the greater financial and life experience resources I have. I care deeply for them, and don't enjoy seeing them struggle.
But I don't always. When the net effect of the responsibility of dealing with an issue they created is making of them a capable adult, the greater part of love for them is in letting them deal with it.
Conservatives don't cavil at aiding their fellows. Studies show they give more to charity, for instance, than their liberal compatriots. You folks just view compassion and empathy in the immediate to short term, we in the medium to long term.
But I don't always. When the net effect of the responsibility of dealing with an issue they created is making of them a capable adult, the greater part of love for them is in letting them deal with it.
Conservatives don't cavil at aiding their fellows. Studies show they give more to charity, for instance, than their liberal compatriots. You folks just view compassion and empathy in the immediate to short term, we in the medium to long term.
21
Conservatives deserve what they need because they're the job creators and producers of wealth. Everyone else is just moochers and looters...
22
Three things:
1. What a coward that talking head is - blasting statements then refusing to defend them.
2. Most fiscal conservatives I know are very generous with their time and money for those whom they believe have a genuine need. The big difference between liberals and conservatives seems to be the pool of people the former believes have a genuine need. (I don't pretend to understand social conservatives).
3. @9 FTW.
1. What a coward that talking head is - blasting statements then refusing to defend them.
2. Most fiscal conservatives I know are very generous with their time and money for those whom they believe have a genuine need. The big difference between liberals and conservatives seems to be the pool of people the former believes have a genuine need. (I don't pretend to understand social conservatives).
3. @9 FTW.
23
making your "charity" a fixed part of government (taxes, social programs, laws etc) is really really really not "medium to short term." that's long term, Seattleblues, long term. instead of making that "charity" the whim of any person's donation urges for a given week, liberals want to make that charity permanent.
unless those laws and programs get undone by conservatives.then they become shorter term. but who's fault is that?
unless those laws and programs get undone by conservatives.then they become shorter term. but who's fault is that?
24
I would like to point out that most conservatives remain in their ideological mind game even when their loved ones are gay, or in need or health insurance, or agonizing over the recent dissolution of their union.
My very conservative family tells me to suck it up when my epilepsy prevents me from being able to buy health insurance, when my Madison union was just dissolved, and when I came out to them as a teenager.
See? They are consistent in their hatred.
My very conservative family tells me to suck it up when my epilepsy prevents me from being able to buy health insurance, when my Madison union was just dissolved, and when I came out to them as a teenager.
See? They are consistent in their hatred.
25
Upper-class people less empathetic than lower-class people according to research recently published in Current Directions in Psychological Science (article titled "Social Class as Culture - The Convergence of Resources and Rank in the Social Realm") also a similar study pub. in Psychological Science (article titled "Social Class, Contextualism, and Empathic Accuracy").
If you Google them I'm sure you could find a free copy.
If you Google them I'm sure you could find a free copy.
26
@20 Oh look, you're back and just as intellectually dishonest as ever. I love it when someone who's said that the only reason people are poor is because they choose to be poor then goes on to say, "Conservatives don't cavil at aiding their fellows."
Really? Are you saying you'd be willing to aid poor people, even though you believe it's their own stupid fault for being poor in the first place?
Don't use words like "compassion" when you don't know what they mean, Seattleblues. Compassion means actually caring more about others than about your own bank account.
Really? Are you saying you'd be willing to aid poor people, even though you believe it's their own stupid fault for being poor in the first place?
You folks just view compassion and empathy in the immediate to short term, we in the medium to long term.
Don't use words like "compassion" when you don't know what they mean, Seattleblues. Compassion means actually caring more about others than about your own bank account.
28
@20 So, um, having a baby is something we should just let women struggle through without paid leave because women are like children who need to learn responsibility?
30
@20: So letting your kids die of cancer because you lose you job and can't get healthcare makes them stronger?
Also, got anything to back up that "study" you cite?
Also, got anything to back up that "study" you cite?
31
Jeez Dan, when you say "our country doesn't give" health care/leave/etc etc, you've got it all wrong. The "country" ain't some mythical fairy god that can give all these goodies out if only you please its hidden sense of empathy enough.
The money for this shit has to be TAKEN from INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE first, by taxes, and only then "given" out later.
Americans just don't like doing this redistribution shit as much as Europeans or Canadians. Fair democratic choice. I (gay, atheist) moved from Europe to the US because I like the system here better. You can all do the same--it's easy enough
The money for this shit has to be TAKEN from INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE first, by taxes, and only then "given" out later.
Americans just don't like doing this redistribution shit as much as Europeans or Canadians. Fair democratic choice. I (gay, atheist) moved from Europe to the US because I like the system here better. You can all do the same--it's easy enough
32
Danny,
why didn't your President and the Democrap Congress give us healthcare and paid leave in 2008?
Why?
why didn't your President and the Democrap Congress give us healthcare and paid leave in 2008?
Why?
33
@20 Accepting the vast consensus of the scientific community that global warming is real and anthropogenic using that knowledge to try to institute changes in energy policy to lessen the massively destructive and harmful effects global warming will reap on the next generations? You mean like that sort of short term thinking?
35
Careful, OuterCow. This is a guy who flatly stated that the world had experienced no heating in the past decade, and has yet to acknowledge this error. (I confronted him with data showing that it had. He pooh-poohed how much warming had occurred, but didn't go on to admit that he had been wrong to say NO warming had taken place.)
36
Mr. Savage, why are you so concerned with what conservatives think instead of being concerned with how the rest of us, you know, the majority, live?
If there were one conservative in a country of 999,999,999 progressives, the progressives would declare themselves powerless and whine about how mean that one conservative is because progressives are, fundamentally, pussies.
If there were one conservative in a country of 999,999,999 progressives, the progressives would declare themselves powerless and whine about how mean that one conservative is because progressives are, fundamentally, pussies.
37
@20, actually recent studies show that compassion, charity, and empathy are more prevalent in the lower class and liberals than in conservatives and the wealthy. I just read an article today on this very topic (link below).
There are even studies suggesting that we are biologically inclined to be liberal or conservative- that our brains actually work differently, with liberals responding better to new ideas, and conservatives more to tradition and established patterns.
Interesting stuff:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44084236/ns/…
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/fashio…
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/28/co…
http://psychcentral.com/news/2007/09/10/…
http://ispp.org/publications/journal/bac…
There are even studies suggesting that we are biologically inclined to be liberal or conservative- that our brains actually work differently, with liberals responding better to new ideas, and conservatives more to tradition and established patterns.
Interesting stuff:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44084236/ns/…
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/fashio…
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/28/co…
http://psychcentral.com/news/2007/09/10/…
http://ispp.org/publications/journal/bac…
38
@7 I can top this. In Germany paid parental leave can be up to 3 years for each child. And then you go back to your career. (But you know what: in Russia it is one year, too) Oh, and those 3 years can be split between father and mother. He can also stay home with the baby, when the baby does not need breast feeding anymore.
It is always good to be inspired by other nations.
It is always good to be inspired by other nations.
40
Yep. Failure of empathy is simplistic, but there's much truth to it. My sister's history of cancer renders her un-insurable, but, surprise, surprise, that's an aspect of the healthcare reform law that my conservative parents like. A mountain of anecdotal evidence ultimately amounts to more than a molehill.
@14 Thanks for the link. I'd seen that before, but it has been awhile, and it fleshes out nicely the notion that conservative and liberal brains approach morality quite differently.
@20 As usual, your analysis is based on questionable data. Conservatives do, on average, donate to charities at a worthy rate, but if you subtract donations to churches and synagogues (only a small fraction of which are used to aid the needy), the numbers are far less impressive.
As for your condescending conclusion about short-term, medium-term and long-term time frames, that is pulled from thin air. Conservatives morality is fine with immediate, short-term needs--if you're sick they'll send you to the E.R., if you're hungry, they'll fund soup kitchens or food banks. But medium and long-term? Well, they might spout a cliche about teaching a person to fish, or they might talk about the long-term redemptive power of accepting Christ, or they might talk of dishing out tough love to their kids, but it all amounts to 'heal thyself.'
@14 Thanks for the link. I'd seen that before, but it has been awhile, and it fleshes out nicely the notion that conservative and liberal brains approach morality quite differently.
@20 As usual, your analysis is based on questionable data. Conservatives do, on average, donate to charities at a worthy rate, but if you subtract donations to churches and synagogues (only a small fraction of which are used to aid the needy), the numbers are far less impressive.
As for your condescending conclusion about short-term, medium-term and long-term time frames, that is pulled from thin air. Conservatives morality is fine with immediate, short-term needs--if you're sick they'll send you to the E.R., if you're hungry, they'll fund soup kitchens or food banks. But medium and long-term? Well, they might spout a cliche about teaching a person to fish, or they might talk about the long-term redemptive power of accepting Christ, or they might talk of dishing out tough love to their kids, but it all amounts to 'heal thyself.'
42
Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish, and he will hook his lip, fall overboard, and drown.
Teach a man to fish, and he will hook his lip, fall overboard, and drown.
43
@15, I had a friend who had a job where she could either get health benefits or get paid more (contract work). She always chose to get paid more. So, lo and behold, one night she calls me, sick as a dog, and asks me to take her to the hospital. Two surgeries, six weeks in the ICU, and one stroke later, she's legally blind and hasn't been able to work in six months. She had enough in savings to cover her living expenses for this time, but not the $500,000+ in medical bills she incurred.
She had always been against national heathcare, because she was "healthy." Turns out, after her ordeal, she was STILL against national healthcare, AND would choose to take the pay over the benefits, still. So, it's cool if we pick up her hospital tab, but god forbid anyone else have that "luxury!"
She had always been against national heathcare, because she was "healthy." Turns out, after her ordeal, she was STILL against national healthcare, AND would choose to take the pay over the benefits, still. So, it's cool if we pick up her hospital tab, but god forbid anyone else have that "luxury!"
44
Mexico - generally described as a third world country by Americans - has universal healthcare now.
Just so you'd know.
Just so you'd know.
47
Law of unintended consequences: if the government says that you have to pay people for months of missed work while they're at home with the baby, employers won't hire as many women, especially young women of child bearing age. They will also be less inclined to hire young men (particularly those who are married and likely to start a family) if the leave is offered to both sexes. Instead of helping young families, this type of requirement may make it very difficult on young people financially.
48
Having kids is a lifestyle choice.
I really don't see why society should require employers to subsidize certain lifestyle choices and not others.
I really don't see why society should require employers to subsidize certain lifestyle choices and not others.
49
Regarding @36 -- Do they call them straw man arguments because your left thinking about the person raising them: "If they only had a brain?"
50
@48, because society would not continue to exist, on a basic and fundamental level, if no one made that "lifestyle choice". It would die off, which is terrible for long-term profitability.
51
I agree with many that mandatory leave for new parents is a good thing. But 47 has a good point. I'm sure it happens that employers balk at hiring reproductive-age women. What are the solutions to this?
I know there are laws to not discriminating against applicants based on sex, but I bet it still happens.
I know there are laws to not discriminating against applicants based on sex, but I bet it still happens.
52
47
for the sad-but-true win.
the law of unintended consequences is one that Liberals seem immune to comprehending.
you get more of what you subsidize.
and less of what you penalize.
compare the out-of-wed birthrate at the beggining of the Great Society to 20 years later. Once LBJ started paying women to have bastards we got a bumper crop.
Why is health insurance tied to employment?
It creates powerful incentives for employeers to not hire people at higher risk of medical problems.
Liberals may try to outlaw that but they can't repeal the Economic Laws that make hiring medically challenged employees financially suicidal for businesses that have to subsidize their healthcare.
If the entire natuion is going to be "entitled" to health care then the pool that pays into the funding mechanism should be (economically) the entire nation.
Throwing that burden on employeers
(as pussy backboneless liberals who are keen to award "benefits" but too dishonest and cowardly to ask the beneficiaries to pay for the benefits and find it easier to bully small businesses... Ted Kennedy was a great humanitarian as long as he was spending the money of American businesses...)
is a huge drain on job creators, especial;ly the smaller businesses that are rthe backbone of the economy.
you Liberals may think that it is a coincidence that jobs are disappearing in the wake of ObamaCare.
guess again.....
for the sad-but-true win.
the law of unintended consequences is one that Liberals seem immune to comprehending.
you get more of what you subsidize.
and less of what you penalize.
compare the out-of-wed birthrate at the beggining of the Great Society to 20 years later. Once LBJ started paying women to have bastards we got a bumper crop.
Why is health insurance tied to employment?
It creates powerful incentives for employeers to not hire people at higher risk of medical problems.
Liberals may try to outlaw that but they can't repeal the Economic Laws that make hiring medically challenged employees financially suicidal for businesses that have to subsidize their healthcare.
If the entire natuion is going to be "entitled" to health care then the pool that pays into the funding mechanism should be (economically) the entire nation.
Throwing that burden on employeers
(as pussy backboneless liberals who are keen to award "benefits" but too dishonest and cowardly to ask the beneficiaries to pay for the benefits and find it easier to bully small businesses... Ted Kennedy was a great humanitarian as long as he was spending the money of American businesses...)
is a huge drain on job creators, especial;ly the smaller businesses that are rthe backbone of the economy.
you Liberals may think that it is a coincidence that jobs are disappearing in the wake of ObamaCare.
guess again.....
55
48
you might want to reconsiderthat selfish shortsighted asshole position, Doot.
sure, a selfish faggot like you who will never (thank god) reproduce can whine how you shouldn't have to pay for schools etc etc but what if EVERYBODY made the same selfish choice you do, Doot?
who do you think will change your diapers in the nursing home in a few years when your destroyed rectum leaks your shit all over you every hour on the hour if EVERYBODY quit having kids?
if there is no new generation to take care of the aging generation it could get messy.
lots of old faggots in the gutters, starving and shitting all over themselves....
is that REALLY the future you want for yourself, Doot?
now run along and wipe your ass while you still can yourself.
soon you'll look back on these days with envy....
you might want to reconsiderthat selfish shortsighted asshole position, Doot.
sure, a selfish faggot like you who will never (thank god) reproduce can whine how you shouldn't have to pay for schools etc etc but what if EVERYBODY made the same selfish choice you do, Doot?
who do you think will change your diapers in the nursing home in a few years when your destroyed rectum leaks your shit all over you every hour on the hour if EVERYBODY quit having kids?
if there is no new generation to take care of the aging generation it could get messy.
lots of old faggots in the gutters, starving and shitting all over themselves....
is that REALLY the future you want for yourself, Doot?
now run along and wipe your ass while you still can yourself.
soon you'll look back on these days with envy....
56
@54 Mandatory unpaid leave could also be called a furlough. That's not a compromise and not an option for the overwhelming majority of workers.
As for the concerns of 47: If businesses are discriminating against women and men of reproductive ages, who are they not discriminating against? That's practically the entire workforce. As for only discriminating against young women- that practice has been around long before paid maternity leave. Regardless of the country or company's policies, if a female gets pregnant she won't be as productive of a worker. This is precisely why we need maternity laws that protect families against capitalism's ever present need for profit.
As for the concerns of 47: If businesses are discriminating against women and men of reproductive ages, who are they not discriminating against? That's practically the entire workforce. As for only discriminating against young women- that practice has been around long before paid maternity leave. Regardless of the country or company's policies, if a female gets pregnant she won't be as productive of a worker. This is precisely why we need maternity laws that protect families against capitalism's ever present need for profit.
58
Um, @52, I think that "throwing the costs on the 'entire nation'" is what most of us are actually in favor of, and what most of the European nations we hold up as examples do. Equal leave, government mandated, so that there's no difference between hiring a man or a woman, and adequate coverage so that people don't have to forego a basic standard of civility to have a child. If you want a 2-earner society, which is what we have, then you've got to give on this point. I don't even want kids and I think this is smart policy.
59
$50.
Yes, it is true that if everyone stopped having babies, there would be no more humanity.
No, it's not true if the government compels employers to pay for people to have kids, people will stop having kids. what 50 said. it means barriers to women in the work force.
Imagine how terrible this world would be if no one wrote books.
Does that mean I have the right to demand from my employer time off so I can write one?
Yes, it is true that if everyone stopped having babies, there would be no more humanity.
No, it's not true if the government compels employers to pay for people to have kids, people will stop having kids. what 50 said. it means barriers to women in the work force.
Imagine how terrible this world would be if no one wrote books.
Does that mean I have the right to demand from my employer time off so I can write one?
60
uhg. that came out wrong. what I meant to say was:
@50.
Yes, it is true that if everyone stopped having babies, there would be no more humanity.
No, it's not true if the government fails to compel employers to pay for people to have kids, people will stop having kids. what 47 said. it means barriers to women in the work force. You can't expect consequences based on intentions alone.
Imagine how terrible this world would be if no one wrote books.
Does that mean I have the right to demand from my employer time off so I can write one?
@50.
Yes, it is true that if everyone stopped having babies, there would be no more humanity.
No, it's not true if the government fails to compel employers to pay for people to have kids, people will stop having kids. what 47 said. it means barriers to women in the work force. You can't expect consequences based on intentions alone.
Imagine how terrible this world would be if no one wrote books.
Does that mean I have the right to demand from my employer time off so I can write one?
61
@ 50.
woa. just read your diatribe.
2 points:
1) practically all choices we make are "selfish" whether we realize/acknowledge it or not.
2) if ALL people only did ANY 1 thing, then then we'd be fucked.
Good thing that's not and never will be the case.
woa. just read your diatribe.
2 points:
1) practically all choices we make are "selfish" whether we realize/acknowledge it or not.
2) if ALL people only did ANY 1 thing, then then we'd be fucked.
Good thing that's not and never will be the case.
63
@ 59 - Your analogy is thoroughly ridiculous.
Humanity survived thousands and thousands of years without books. It wouldn't survive one generation without children. You can't compare the two.
(Incidentally, there's a very good book on this subject: The Children of Men).
Besides, it's not like there aren't dozens of countries that have such a system which the US could look to as models.
Humanity survived thousands and thousands of years without books. It wouldn't survive one generation without children. You can't compare the two.
(Incidentally, there's a very good book on this subject: The Children of Men).
Besides, it's not like there aren't dozens of countries that have such a system which the US could look to as models.
64
Like I said, people having children isn't contingent on government compelling employers to pay them to do so.
65
@ 64 - You're totally right. But it's good social policy, as has been demonstrated over and over again in many other countries.
66
Is writing books something that almost everyone participates in and is a fundamental and biological part of human life? What the fuck are you talking about?
67
@47 Pure conjecture pulled straight out of your ass. You do realize that we are the ONLY first world country w/o paid parental leave right? It says that in the video. You don't need to guess what the results are as there are plenty of other countries that prove that your fears are completely unfounded and false and made up.
Why do Americans do shit like this? "What horrible things will happen if we have single payer etc??" I DONT KNOW? LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER COUNTRIES THAT HAVE IT??? Fuck.
Why do Americans do shit like this? "What horrible things will happen if we have single payer etc??" I DONT KNOW? LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER COUNTRIES THAT HAVE IT??? Fuck.
68
56 - oops, well, mandatory as in it is mandatory for the EMPLOYER to ALLOW the employee to take leave if s/he wants it. i don't know the proper language to use for that idea.
sure, getting paid would be better for the employee. but i'm just wondering if, for the employer, its really fair for them to take the DOUBLE burden of losing the work output of the employee AND the money. so the compromise would be losing the work (which is a benefit to employee; s/he gets to spend time with kid), but not the money.
For a single parent who couldn't afford UNpaid leave - I think the state should take up the the slack. The state should pay, not businesses. We should all share that burden and not place the burden totally on the employer.
sure, getting paid would be better for the employee. but i'm just wondering if, for the employer, its really fair for them to take the DOUBLE burden of losing the work output of the employee AND the money. so the compromise would be losing the work (which is a benefit to employee; s/he gets to spend time with kid), but not the money.
For a single parent who couldn't afford UNpaid leave - I think the state should take up the the slack. The state should pay, not businesses. We should all share that burden and not place the burden totally on the employer.
69
@ 68 - In some countries this is done through unemployment benefits. The employer's share of the financial burden is thus reduced to a minimum. No big deal.
If Americans would just accept that they can learn something from other countries, ALL of your concerns would be blown away. This is a useless debate.
If Americans would just accept that they can learn something from other countries, ALL of your concerns would be blown away. This is a useless debate.
70
Hm. I just don't think people should have babies at all. Then the conservatives might stop whinging so damned much and shut their fucking mouths.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) Says Members of His Party Have Rocks for Brains by Charles Mudede
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
Barack Obama Smoked a Lot of Pot as a Young Man by Paul Constant
-
The Limits of Keynesianism by Charles Mudede
-
Rural America by Charles Mudede
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (71) RSS