We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
That is infantile thinking. We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.Why should a business owner or taxpayer be forced to pay for a woman to go off and have a kid? .....
Just another example of those supporting this thinking the choice to do so belongs solely to the woman while the costs of making that choice belongs to anyone but the one that made the choice.
We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
That womans child will save your life one day, or fight a war for you. We all benefit so we should all share the burden. Its not complicated.That is infantile thinking. We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.Why should a business owner or taxpayer be forced to pay for a woman to go off and have a kid? .....
Just another example of those supporting this thinking the choice to do so belongs solely to the woman while the costs of making that choice belongs to anyone but the one that made the choice.
Infantile thinking is believing someone should be able to make a choice, tell you to butt out, then believe it's OK to demand those who were told to butt out to pay the price.
The problem with your view is those making the choices they can't afford are benefiting but not sharing the burden. I don't owe a woman a damn thing because she chooses to have kids she can't afford, tells me her choice to do so isn't my business then expects me to be one of those forced to help pay for something SHE chose to do.
That womans child will save your life one day, or fight a war for you. We all benefit so we should all share the burden. Its not complicated.That is infantile thinking. We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.Why should a business owner or taxpayer be forced to pay for a woman to go off and have a kid? .....
Just another example of those supporting this thinking the choice to do so belongs solely to the woman while the costs of making that choice belongs to anyone but the one that made the choice.
Infantile thinking is believing someone should be able to make a choice, tell you to butt out, then believe it's OK to demand those who were told to butt out to pay the price.
The problem with your view is those making the choices they can't afford are benefiting but not sharing the burden. I don't owe a woman a damn thing because she chooses to have kids she can't afford, tells me her choice to do so isn't my business then expects me to be one of those forced to help pay for something SHE chose to do.
I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
In the UK there are two levels of maternity pay. Statutory which is paid by the government out of tax money. And employer funded maternity.I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
Law enforcement isn't justified. These are questions of personal and social morality, not legal justice.
That womans child will save your life one day, or fight a war for you. We all benefit so we should all share the burden. Its not complicated.
In the UK there are two levels of maternity pay. Statutory which is paid by the government out of tax money. And employer funded maternity.I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
Law enforcement isn't justified. These are questions of personal and social morality, not legal justice.
The employer funded is not mandatory and depends on the employer.Good employers pay it.
The statutory pay is seen as vital in helping people have children as it helps to negate the loss of income during this period. I have never heard anybody criticise it.
As to forcing private firms to pay it I am not sure how that would work, especially for smaller employers. Some form of tax incentive might be better.
The job market is very much in the employers favour at the moment and the upshot of that is poor pay and conditions.Things will improve when people have a choice of jobs. Nothing is ever given out of a sense of what is right.In the UK there are two levels of maternity pay. Statutory which is paid by the government out of tax money. And employer funded maternity.I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
Law enforcement isn't justified. These are questions of personal and social morality, not legal justice.
The employer funded is not mandatory and depends on the employer.Good employers pay it.
The statutory pay is seen as vital in helping people have children as it helps to negate the loss of income during this period. I have never heard anybody criticise it.
As to forcing private firms to pay it I am not sure how that would work, especially for smaller employers. Some form of tax incentive might be better.
Imagine a world in which employers actually like their employees and want what's best for them.
Clearly not something the Hard Men are familiar with.
The underlying misogyny is a whole 'nother story.
In the UK there are two levels of maternity pay. Statutory which is paid by the government out of tax money. And employer funded maternity.I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.
I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
Law enforcement isn't justified. These are questions of personal and social morality, not legal justice.
The employer funded is not mandatory and depends on the employer.Good employers pay it.
The statutory pay is seen as vital in helping people have children as it helps to negate the loss of income during this period. I have never heard anybody criticise it.
As to forcing private firms to pay it I am not sure how that would work, especially for smaller employers. Some form of tax incentive might be better.
Imagine a world in which employers actually like their employees and want what's best for them.
Imagine a world where employers and employees decide for themselves what's best for them.
The job market is very much in the employers favour at the moment and the upshot of that is poor pay and conditions.Things will improve when people have a choice of jobs. Nothing is ever given out of a sense of what is right.In the UK there are two levels of maternity pay. Statutory which is paid by the government out of tax money. And employer funded maternity.I think that on the basic nuts and bolts of life the government,local or national, is best placed.Obviously subject to the will of the people.I agree. The question is whether government is the proper tool.
Law enforcement isn't justified. These are questions of personal and social morality, not legal justice.
The employer funded is not mandatory and depends on the employer.Good employers pay it.
The statutory pay is seen as vital in helping people have children as it helps to negate the loss of income during this period. I have never heard anybody criticise it.
As to forcing private firms to pay it I am not sure how that would work, especially for smaller employers. Some form of tax incentive might be better.
Imagine a world in which employers actually like their employees and want what's best for them.
Clearly not something the Hard Men are familiar with.
The underlying misogyny is a whole 'nother story.
The argument I struggle with is that we are all individual self sufficient people, isolated and living on a mountain,drinking spring water and feeding off Elk.
"I havent got kids so why should I pay taxes for schools" ?
Its such a dishonest position. Almost as dishonest as a "pro lifer" saying
She made the choice and told me to butt out. It's her responsibility not mine.
They would deny the poor girl the choice in the first place.
No,why would you think that ?Having a baby is a stressful time. Science has shown us that it is mainly women who have babies. If men had babies there would be a law giving us a year off on full pay.I wonder if helping people when they need it might be cheaper in the long run than telling them to eff off ?
"if they need it" is an interesting term.
You are a woman ?
That is infantile thinking. We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.Why should a business owner or taxpayer be forced to pay for a woman to go off and have a kid? .....
Just another example of those supporting this thinking the choice to do so belongs solely to the woman while the costs of making that choice belongs to anyone but the one that made the choice.
Imagine a world where employers and employees decide for themselves what's best for them.
There is such a world, in the executive suite. Below that, only with rare exception. Them that's got shall get.
Imagine a world where employers and employees decide for themselves what's best for them.
There is such a world, in the executive suite. Below that, only with rare exception. Them that's got shall get.
So you can't imagine such a thing? What's wrong with employees taking the jobs that suite their needs? Why is it any of your business how someone else is compensated by an employer? Is there any limit to your desire to control others?
Obviously I am too much of a "libtard" to own a gun.That is infantile thinking. We live together, as a society, in a modern joined up world, we enjoy the benefits and should share the burden.Why should a business owner or taxpayer be forced to pay for a woman to go off and have a kid? .....
Just another example of those supporting this thinking the choice to do so belongs solely to the woman while the costs of making that choice belongs to anyone but the one that made the choice.
Not at the point of a gun.
Imagine a world where employers and employees decide for themselves what's best for them.
There is such a world, in the executive suite. Below that, only with rare exception. Them that's got shall get.