• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should All Companies be Required to Provide Paid Maternity Leave?

Should Congress Pass A Bill That Requires Employers to Provide Paid Maternity Leave?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 30.8%

  • No

    Votes: 58 63.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 5 5.5%
  • Total voters
    91
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you agree with the President's recent statements that the US should join the rest of the industrialized world and have provided paid maternity leave? The President said that Congress should work on legislation requiring employers to have paid maternity leave? Do you believe this should be law or not?
Click to expand...

I will admit to being torn.



On the one hand, this would make it harder for women to get jobs. It would disadvantage them against men.

On the other, it is good policy (not because of that, but in spite of it).
 
Mycroft said:
I'm not going to get into a pissing contest about what a liberal, by definition, is. Heck, LIBERALS call themselves liberals...until it turns into a dirty word, then they call themselves progressives...so I'll call them liberals. And, yes...Obama, his Democrat buddies and his supporters are liberals.
Click to expand...

Okay, I apologize for that, but I don't agree that liberal and progressive are mutually exclusive. Heck, progressive isn't even the best word to describe me; it just happened to be the closest out of the available leans.

Anyway...back on topic. Why do you liberals want to place the cost of consequences of individual choices on the backs of businesses? Do you think those businesses are a bottomless money-bag that you can raid for your feel-good social agenda items? You would be more honest is you just raised taxes and let the government pay for it...but it still wouldn't be the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like businesses are suffering more than the average worker, which is simply not true. In reality, the U.S. bends over backwards to serve the interests of corporation; 1 in 9 corporations pay no taxes, and the corporation pays less in taxes than the average taxpayer. (see link) Also, there's no genuine proof that this kind of mandate would hurt businesses at any measurable amount. Every other first world nation offers paid parental leave of some sort, and capitalism is alive and well there. In addition to the abortion reduction issue that I mentioned earlier, if workers believe that it is their right to have paid parental leave, and the vast majority of them do, (see second link) they will be happier with an employer that provides it, and therefore be more productive.

Over 10 Percent Of America's Largest Companies Pay Zero Percent Tax Rates
Paid Sick Leave Supported By Most Americans, Poll Finds
 
cpwill said:
I will admit to being torn.



On the one hand, this would make it harder for women to get jobs. It would disadvantage them against men.

On the other, it is good policy (not because of that, but in spite of it).
Click to expand...

Why not simply make it paid parental leave instead? It ends gender bias on the subject and eliminates the disadvantage towards women as far as employment.
 
SocialDemocrat said:
Okay, I apologize for that, but I don't agree that liberal and progressive are mutually exclusive. Heck, progressive isn't even the best word to describe me; it just happened to be the closest out of the available leans.



You make it sound like businesses are suffering more than the average worker, which is simply not true. In reality, the U.S. bends over backwards to serve the interests of corporation; 1 in 9 corporations pay no taxes, and the corporation pays less in taxes than the average taxpayer. (see link) Also, there's no genuine proof that this kind of mandate would hurt businesses at any measurable amount. Every other first world nation offers paid parental leave of some sort, and capitalism is alive and well there. In addition to the abortion reduction issue that I mentioned earlier, if workers believe that it is their right to have paid parental leave, and the vast majority of them do, (see second link) they will be happier with an employer that provides it, and therefore be more productive.

Over 10 Percent Of America's Largest Companies Pay Zero Percent Tax Rates
Paid Sick Leave Supported By Most Americans, Poll Finds
Click to expand...

Taxes have nothing to do with it. We aren't talking about taxing businesses and then giving the money to new mothers. We are talking about the government deciding that businesses should pay their employees for something that resulted from that employee's personal choice. Heck, you might as well make businesses pay for a big screen TV for each of their employees if that's what the employee wants to buy. This is akin to making an employer pay a "living wage" to their employee. And NONE of it has a lick to do with the work that employee is doing...or the money that employee is earning...for the company.

Now...if an individual employee wants to negotiate for paid parental leave from a prospective employer, that's fine. But the government has no business getting involved.

You liberals really need to get away from this idea that the government has a right to mandate that others pay for people's personal choices. Like I said...just be honest...just raise taxes on everyone...enact another entitlement program.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Taxes have nothing to do with it. We aren't talking about taxing businesses and then giving the money to new mothers. We are talking about the government deciding that businesses should pay their employees for something that resulted from that employee's personal choice. Heck, you might as well make businesses pay for a big screen TV for each of their employees if that's what the employee wants to buy. This is akin to making an employer pay a "living wage" to their employee. And NONE of it has a lick to do with the work that employee is doing...or the money that employee is earning...for the company.

Now...if an individual employee wants to negotiate for paid parental leave from a prospective employer, that's fine. But the government has no business getting involved.

You liberals really need to get away from this idea that the government has a right to mandate that others pay for people's personal choices. Like I said...just be honest...just raise taxes on everyone...enact another entitlement program.
Click to expand...

It does have to do with taxes because the low corporate tax rate and loopholes used by corporations means that they bring in more profit which is given to the CEOs at the top of the food chain. They're not suffering, and they won't suffer from a paid leave mandate. There's a huge difference between paid parental leave and free flat screen TVs. Firstly, paid parental leave directly has to do with the employer-employee relationship, whilst flat screen TVs do not, and secondly, paid parental leave can be necessary for economic stability, while flat screen TVs are not. A happier employee means a more productive employee, and as I evidenced before, most people, including parents who have been denied access to paid parental leave, believe that they should have parental leave, and would be more satisfied with a business that grants them parental leave. Regarding negotiations, how is a worker supposed to participate in the collective bargaining process when states are passing the incorrectly named "right-to-work" laws. Allowing your employees to have paid parental leave also puts companies at a competitive disadvantage when it's not across the board, so the mandate will actually benefit businesses that haven chosen to already give their employees paid parental leave. "the government has a right to mandate that others pay for people's personal choices." You disagree with this statement, but isn't this statement the very basis of taxation itself? Do you therefore oppose taxation?
 
SocialDemocrat said:
It does have to do with taxes because the low corporate tax rate and loopholes used by corporations means that they bring in more profit which is given to the CEOs at the top of the food chain. They're not suffering, and they won't suffer from a paid leave mandate. There's a huge difference between paid parental leave and free flat screen TVs. Firstly, paid parental leave directly has to do with the employer-employee relationship, whilst flat screen TVs do not, and secondly, paid parental leave can be necessary for economic stability, while flat screen TVs are not. A happier employee means a more productive employee, and as I evidenced before, most people, including parents who have been denied access to paid parental leave, believe that they should have parental leave, and would be more satisfied with a business that grants them parental leave. Regarding negotiations, how is a worker supposed to participate in the collective bargaining process when states are passing the incorrectly named "right-to-work" laws. Allowing your employees to have paid parental leave also puts companies at a competitive disadvantage when it's not across the board, so the mandate will actually benefit businesses that haven chosen to already give their employees paid parental leave. "the government has a right to mandate that others pay for people's personal choices." You disagree with this statement, but isn't this statement the very basis of taxation itself? Do you therefore oppose taxation?
Click to expand...
Why do democrats/socialists love fascism so much?
 
SocialDemocrat said:
It does have to do with taxes because the low corporate tax rate and loopholes used by corporations means that they bring in more profit which is given to the CEOs at the top of the food chain. They're not suffering, and they won't suffer from a paid leave mandate.
Click to expand...

If you don't like corporate loopholes, then do something about THAT. Don't try to use it as justification for screwing businesses over.

There's a huge difference between paid parental leave and free flat screen TVs.
Click to expand...

No there isn't. Both things are the result of personal choice of the individual.

Firstly, paid parental leave directly has to do with the employer-employee relationship, whilst flat screen TVs do not,
Click to expand...

Well, you are right on this one. If a company has to pay an employee to not do any work, that's going to hurt the company. The employee will be watching TV on their own time.

and secondly, paid parental leave can be necessary for economic stability, while flat screen TVs are not.
Click to expand...

So would the individual making wise decisions...like not having a baby...or buying a TV...unless they can afford it.

A happier employee means a more productive employee, and as I evidenced before, most people, including parents who have been denied access to paid parental leave, believe that they should have parental leave, and would be more satisfied with a business that grants them parental leave.
Click to expand...

All that may be true...but that is a decision arrived at between the employer and the employee. The government has no business mandating that companies spend money...just because the EMPLOYEE wants a benefit.

Regarding negotiations, how is a worker supposed to participate in the collective bargaining process when states are passing the incorrectly named "right-to-work" laws. Allowing your employees to have paid parental leave also puts companies at a competitive disadvantage when it's not across the board, so the mandate will actually benefit businesses that haven chosen to already give their employees paid parental leave. "the government has a right to mandate that others pay for people's personal choices." You disagree with this statement, but isn't this statement the very basis of taxation itself? Do you therefore oppose taxation?
Click to expand...

Collective bargaining?? What the hell does THAT have to do with anything?

You really don't know anything about business, do you? All companies are subject to falling under a competitive disadvantage...or advantage...depending on decisions they make. That's the way it works. Don't screw things up by getting the government involved.

Mandating that a business pay for the personal choice of a private citizen is not a tax. It is simply government issuing dictates. Taxes have nothing to do with this issue.

Look, you are twisting, spinning and flying in the breeze trying to justify the government acting as a dictator. It's not working.
 
Misterveritis said:
Why do democrats/socialists love fascism so much?
Click to expand...

"Fascism /fæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe." -Wikipedia

Under what circumstances is arguing for paid parental leave radical authoritarian nationalism? Also, I'm neither a democrat nor a socialist.
 
SocialDemocrat said:
"Fascism /fæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe." -Wikipedia

Under what circumstances is arguing for paid parental leave radical authoritarian nationalism? Also, I'm neither a democrat nor a socialist.
Click to expand...
There are other definitions. One, perhaps the most important, is where the government controls businesses through regulations. That is what we have in the US.

If you claim you are neither a socialist nor a democrat then you are a liar. At the minimum you are a fascist.
 
Mycroft said:
If you don't like corporate loopholes, then do something about THAT. Don't try to use it as justification for screwing businesses over.



No there isn't. Both things are the result of personal choice of the individual.



Well, you are right on this one. If a company has to pay an employee to not do any work, that's going to hurt the company. The employee will be watching TV on their own time.



So would the individual making wise decisions...like not having a baby...or buying a TV...unless they can afford it.



All that may be true...but that is a decision arrived at between the employer and the employee. The government has no business mandating that companies spend money...just because the EMPLOYEE wants a benefit.



Collective bargaining?? What the hell does THAT have to do with anything?

You really don't know anything about business, do you? All companies are subject to falling under a competitive disadvantage...or advantage...depending on decisions they make. That's the way it works. Don't screw things up by getting the government involved.

Mandating that a business pay for the personal choice of a private citizen is not a tax. It is simply government issuing dictates. Taxes have nothing to do with this issue.

Look, you are twisting, spinning and flying in the breeze trying to justify the government acting as a dictator. It's not working.
Click to expand...

The point about corporate tax loopholes is that you're portraying businesses as though they're victimized by the situation. I was using corporate tax loopholes as an example that corporations suffering in this country is simply not true. Again, you referred to paid parental leave as "hurting" the company, despite the fact that companies based in every other first world country get along fine while paying for parental leave of their employees. Regarding the decisions between the employer/employee, what makes the company more deserving of profits than they can get along fine without than a worker who needs paid parental leave to remain economically stable. By "negotiate," I assume you were referring to collective bargaining, but since you weren't, the employee won't have anyone sticking up for them, so unless the employer is unusually generous, they're not getting paid parental leave. How does getting the government involved "screw everything up?" Companies that give paid parental leave are at a competitive disadvantage, just as companies that pay their workers a higher wage than the minimum wage are at a competitive disadvantage. If everyone is required to give employees paid parental leave, those who are already providing it will no longer be at a competitive disadvantage. How does that qualify as the government screwing things up? The reason I brought up taxes is that you said you oppose the idea of a government mandate such as this one, yet taxes are a government mandate upon citizens, and are preferably used for wealth redistribution. And lastly, how is supporting a paid parental leave mandate go against democratic or republican values?
 
Misterveritis said:
There are other definitions. One, perhaps the most important, is where the government controls businesses through regulations. That is what we have in the US.
Click to expand...

[citation needed]

If you claim you are neither a socialist nor a democrat then you are a liar. At the minimum you are a fascist.
Click to expand...

I believe in social democracy, hence my username. There are more ideologies on the left than just democrats and socialists. ;)
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you agree with the President's recent statements that the US should join the rest of the industrialized world and have provided paid maternity leave? The President said that Congress should work on legislation requiring employers to have paid maternity leave? Do you believe this should be law or not?
Click to expand...

Absolutely! The u.s. is too separated from the rest of the world, we're like the country version of an angsty teen who rejects everything their parents do.:newhere:
 
liberalgirl said:
Absolutely! The u.s. is too separated from the rest of the world, we're like the country version of an angsty teen who rejects everything their parents do.:newhere:
Click to expand...


that's not a valid rationale for the federal government requiring companies pay for months of work that is not done.


why hire a woman if you know you'll have to shell out months and months of pay for .. nothing?

hire a man instead... no need to take a loss, no need to replace that worker when she's with child... and the man will probably be denied those benefits anyways ( while we pretend to be against discrimination.)
 
Moon said:
So when someone says personal responsibility in not getting pregnant, you jump to abortion. Interesting.
Click to expand...

Make an adult decision on what is important to them. Child, or career?
--Asking is that implying does a woman have a right to an abortion --
 
SocialDemocrat said:
The point about corporate tax loopholes is that you're portraying businesses as though they're victimized by the situation. I was using corporate tax loopholes as an example that corporations suffering in this country is simply not true. Again, you referred to paid parental leave as "hurting" the company, despite the fact that companies based in every other first world country get along fine while paying for parental leave of their employees. Regarding the decisions between the employer/employee, what makes the company more deserving of profits than they can get along fine without than a worker who needs paid parental leave to remain economically stable. By "negotiate," I assume you were referring to collective bargaining, but since you weren't, the employee won't have anyone sticking up for them, so unless the employer is unusually generous, they're not getting paid parental leave. How does getting the government involved "screw everything up?" Companies that give paid parental leave are at a competitive disadvantage, just as companies that pay their workers a higher wage than the minimum wage are at a competitive disadvantage. If everyone is required to give employees paid parental leave, those who are already providing it will no longer be at a competitive disadvantage. How does that qualify as the government screwing things up? The reason I brought up taxes is that you said you oppose the idea of a government mandate such as this one, yet taxes are a government mandate upon citizens, and are preferably used for wealth redistribution. And lastly, how is supporting a paid parental leave mandate go against democratic or republican values?
Click to expand...

If you are trying to drive me away from this discussion by posting that wall of text response to me, you've succeeded.

Reformat the above screed into a readable and logical missive and I'll respond.
 
Mycroft said:
If you are trying to drive me away from this discussion by posting that wall of text response to me, you've succeeded.

Reformat the above screed into a readable and logical missive and I'll respond.
Click to expand...

Apologies. This has been done:

Mycroft said:
If you don't like corporate loopholes, then do something about THAT. Don't try to use it as justification for screwing businesses over.
Click to expand...

The point about corporate tax loopholes is that you're portraying businesses as though they're victimized by the situation. I was using corporate tax loopholes as an example that corporations suffering in this country is simply not true.

No there isn't. Both things are the result of personal choice of the individual.



Well, you are right on this one. If a company has to pay an employee to not do any work, that's going to hurt the company. The employee will be watching TV on their own time.
Click to expand...

Again, you referred to paid parental leave as "hurting" the company, despite the fact that companies based in every other first world country get along fine while paying for parental leave of their employees.

So would the individual making wise decisions...like not having a baby...or buying a TV...unless they can afford it.



All that may be true...but that is a decision arrived at between the employer and the employee. The government has no business mandating that companies spend money...just because the EMPLOYEE wants a benefit.
Click to expand...

Regarding the decisions between the employer/employee, what makes the company more deserving of profits than they can get along fine without than a worker who needs paid parental leave to remain economically stable.

Collective bargaining?? What the hell does THAT have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

By "negotiate," I assume you were referring to collective bargaining, but since you weren't, the employee won't have anyone sticking up for them, so unless the employer is unusually generous, they're not getting paid parental leave.

You really don't know anything about business, do you? All companies are subject to falling under a competitive disadvantage...or advantage...depending on decisions they make. That's the way it works. Don't screw things up by getting the government involved.
Click to expand...

How does getting the government involved "screw everything up?" Companies that give paid parental leave are at a competitive disadvantage, just as companies that pay their workers a higher wage than the minimum wage are at a competitive disadvantage. If everyone is required to give employees paid parental leave, those who are already providing it will no longer be at a competitive disadvantage. How does that qualify as the government screwing things up

Mandating that a business pay for the personal choice of a private citizen is not a tax. It is simply government issuing dictates. Taxes have nothing to do with this issue.
Click to expand...

The reason I brought up taxes is that you said you oppose the idea of a government mandate such as this one, yet taxes are a government mandate upon citizens, and are preferably used for wealth redistribution.

Look, you are twisting, spinning and flying in the breeze trying to justify the government acting as a dictator. It's not working.
Click to expand...

And lastly, how is supporting a paid parental leave mandate go against democratic or republican values?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Make an adult decision on what is important to them. Child, or career?
--Asking is that implying does a woman have a right to an abortion --
Click to expand...

it is kinda weird that you jumped right to abortion... I mean you jumped right over birth control without batting an eye.
 
Another reason not to hire straight women. Lesbians rarely get pregnant.
If you only hire lesbians, men, and women that are not of child bearing age the problem is solved. :2wave:

.
 
Does anyone on this forum have any idea why the birthrate in the USA is so low?
 
SocialDemocrat said:
Apologies. This has been done:
Click to expand...

Thank you.

The point about corporate tax loopholes is that you're portraying businesses as though they're victimized by the situation. I was using corporate tax loopholes as an example that corporations suffering in this country is simply not true.
Click to expand...

And I contend that tax loopholes are irrelevant. There is great harm to businesses from this proposal:

Many businesses won't be able to afford the cost of paying an employee to do nothing. Many businesses don't earn the profits to absorb that cost. Many businesses are not able to raise prices to make up the additional costs without losing customers. This can only result in adverse effects on the businesses and/or their employees.

Again, you referred to paid parental leave as "hurting" the company, despite the fact that companies based in every other first world country get along fine while paying for parental leave of their employees.
Click to expand...

Something that everyone learns sooner or later is that doing something "just because the neighbors do it" is a stupid way to run their lives. The same is true for countries.

Regarding the decisions between the employer/employee, what makes the company more deserving of profits than they can get along fine without than a worker who needs paid parental leave to remain economically stable.
Click to expand...

Good God!!, but you are an arrogant SOB to think that YOU know better whether a company can "get along fine" without their profits!! That's that liberal/progressive/Democrat "I know better than YOU do" attitude.

By "negotiate," I assume you were referring to collective bargaining, but since you weren't, the employee won't have anyone sticking up for them, so unless the employer is unusually generous, they're not getting paid parental leave.
Click to expand...

By "negotiate", I was referring to the normal course of events...interview, offer, counter-offer, discussion, ultimate agreement or disagreement...that is a part of any decision to employ or be employed.

How does getting the government involved "screw everything up?" Companies that give paid parental leave are at a competitive disadvantage, just as companies that pay their workers a higher wage than the minimum wage are at a competitive disadvantage. If everyone is required to give employees paid parental leave, those who are already providing it will no longer be at a competitive disadvantage. How does that qualify as the government screwing things up
Click to expand...

A company that decides, for themselves, to offer an employee paid parental leave is not necessarily at a competitive disadvantage. It may very well be worth their while...and advantageous to their bottom line...to incorporate those costs. But the key is that it is left to the company to decide. When the government starts dictating, you've now taken the decision away from the company. As I've said before, there will be adverse effects on many companies. THAT is how the government is screwing things up.

The reason I brought up taxes is that you said you oppose the idea of a government mandate such as this one, yet taxes are a government mandate upon citizens, and are preferably used for wealth redistribution.
Click to expand...

Again, I contend that "taxes" is irrelevant. Now...if you had brought up Obamacare, then you WOULD be making a relevant point...but still a bad one. This proposal is not requiring a business to pay money to the government...as in taxes. It is more like Obamacare in that it is requiring businesses to buy something they may or may not want...that is an extra benefit for their employee. As I've said before...while still a bad idea, you would be more honest to advocate for an increase in taxes and the creation of another government entitlement...paid parental leave.

And lastly, how is supporting a paid parental leave mandate go against democratic or republican values?
Click to expand...

Well...I didn't say anything about democratic or republican values, so I won't answer a strawman question. I DID say that this proposal is nothing more than the government becoming a dictatorship...demanding that a business spend money on something they may or may not want to buy. We have entirely too much of this kind of thing already. Witness Obamacare.
 
Paschendale said:
Absolutely. Many women are forced to abandon their careers in order to have children or at least take a significant hit to. If family really is such an important value in this country, we shouldn't make it such a hardship for working women to also have families.

Every other western nation enforces paid maternity leave, and they benefit from it tremendously.
Click to expand...

Typical liberal view...I want something, that means I deserve it, that means others should pay for it.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Do you agree with the President's recent statements that the US should join the rest of the industrialized world and have provided paid maternity leave? The President said that Congress should work on legislation requiring employers to have paid maternity leave? Do you believe this should be law or not?
Click to expand...
Only if your objective is to get employers to stop hiring women between the ages of 20 and 35.

A better altenative would be to let parents to split the maternity leave between them any way they see fit.
Biological needs means the mother has to take the first week or so, but after that the dad is quite capable of providing nurture and care.

Problems solved through freedom of choice are perferable to random politically motivated social engineering.
 
shrubnose said:
Does anyone on this forum have any idea why the birthrate in the USA is so low?
Click to expand...

Selfishness and the "me, now" attitude of young people, starting with the baby boomer generation.

I'm hopeful that the next generation will believe more in family and children as assets worth accumulating.
 
DA60 said:
Typical liberal view..
.I want something, that means I deserve it, that means others should pay for it.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




If the USA wants to increase the birth rate in all demographic groups it's going to have to start paying maternity leave to all women.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom