Wow. That (http://www.charlotte.com/409/story/79938.html) almost made me wonder if my eyes should be watering up while reading it.
Welcome to America, where we have the freedom to seek out jobs that have generous benefits. And, if at that point in time, we do not qualify for such jobs, we have the freedom to go to school and/or attain further training to make ourselves more marketable for employment with the most such desirable employers.
We also have the freedom to seek union shelter, which would provide the opportunity to put my career in neutral while the benefits I derive from union membership slowly suck the competitiveness out of my employer until one day it has to close up shop because it is either losing money (see: Ford, GM) or losing customers (see: public schools).
Even better than that, we have the freedom to downshift our career into full slacker mode and work a job that pays less than double the minimum wage, another economic, societal drag of a policy. The hours are super flexible and I don't have to think or exert myself too much at work. Heck, I could even go to work stoned and not relegate that kinda partying to my off-hours. And if I need to go to the doctor, I'll just stroll right up to the ER and whip out my Medicaid card. Sometimes I miss such flexible, care-free work-hours (Although I didn't get high or fall back on Medicaid). Honestly, I do. That'd be cool if I could go back to a job like that, much like Lester Burnham did in American Beauty, and know that I could be taken care of by Uncle Sam. There's just ... there's just this issue I have:
I have more pride. I have a greater sense of responsibility. I feel I ought to be self-sufficient, especially since I now have a family. Everyone makes choices. If you choose to make yourself marketable only for jobs that allow few, if any benefits, then you should live with the consequences. Government should not intrude in the free marketplace. Businesses should offer the benefits they want and can get away with. If Target offers better leave benefits than Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart suffers.
How many years has it been now that liberals do not understand the law of unintended consequences?? You tax more, which is what would be required for "a paid leave fund for workers nationwide", and the economy suffers. You regulate more and employers start receding (That's based on the same word as "recession", in case you didn't notice) from the labor market. Hence, unemployment increases, and the economy suffers. Incentives to work or increase productivity declines and what results is, actually, the downward spiral in employment I mentioned previously: from self-improvement to union protection to hourly freeloader. Society suffers because the work ethic that made this country great, better than any other, disappears. Pretty soon, you start stacking more regulations on top of more regulations, more taxes upon taxes and you get...
If you want the European or Venezuelan style of economy-wrecking socialism, why don't you just come out and say it?
