Comment by shimman
2 months ago
Maybe it should be the companies job, being jobless in the US is a potential death sentence and since we don't have universal healthcare, universal childcare, or universal higher education/vocational training the onus should be forced on the companies to provide welfare for workers since they are so adamant about not paying taxes to create a welfare system that doesn't mean homelessness or death.
There is also no industry standard for severance, it's not federally mandated and not a guaranteed benefit.
I'd be very hesitant to throw out so many of the fundamentals that made America into what it has been for the last couple centuries.
The goal, at least here, is to expect individuals to mostly take care of themselves rather than depending in the state or some other authority to do it for them.
Universal healthcare, guaranteed indefinite severance, universal childcare, etc are completely antithetical to our system. Maybe the majority is ready and willing to throw that old system out, but if so we need to do it by focusing on the fundamentals rather than getting distracted with higher level implementation details.
you mean that system that has created the most wealth inequality in many decades if not ever?
Yet people risk their lives to go in illegally. Something doesn't track.
Its because, inequality is not the problem.
The problem is the ability to move between income levels. That coefficient used to the highest in the US. Rich people could and did go poor. Poor people could be rich.
That index was always the highest by far in the US, but now its decreasing. That's the real issue.
2 replies →
Empires often create increasing wealth inequality as they begin to fail, that's not unique to the US.
> Universal healthcare, guaranteed indefinite severance, universal childcare, etc are completely antithetical to our system.
I don't see how that follows. How is your system that different from e.g. the UK, which manages to have all of those things (severance is not indefinite and is unemployment).
Unless I'm drastically misinformed, the UK is dealing with a mountain of issues including immigration, economic problems, and quality of the healthcare being provided.
6 replies →
I don't think it should be the companies job, but I would be ok with it being paid for by taxes companies pay.
Requiring companies to do all of these extra things just gives larger companies more and more advantages, since they have an economy of scale to provide go government-type services.
I don't want my company to be in charge of my whole life. Let them pay taxes to a government that can provide those things equally for everyone.
What's the difference in it being a responsibility of the company and it being a program paid for by races paid by companies?
I mean this as a genuine question, in case that isn't clear. To me the latter is just socializing the cost across multiple companies, but I'm happy to be wrong here.
Unemployment taxes/benefits are largely like that. And they are experience rated, so high risk pay more.