Paid Leave

And? I think it is a good idea.

 

Twelve weeks is kind of a short time to raise a kid isn't it?

 

Watch the businesses leave New York.

I don't support this, nope, not at all. Too much potential for abuse.

 

Long enough to set up someone else to do it for you. It takes a village, you know......

 

If a company wishes to offer this as a benefit and incentive? Great! If the government mandates it? Economic disaster.

 

I don't know about any of you, but after my daughter was born my family desperately could have used something like this. (and no it was not because I wanted to stay home). I was in the hospital for two months and then could not walk for a couple of months after I got home. I could not take care of the baby. There was no one else to care for the baby, except for my husband. He had to take a 3 month leave of absense-unpaid, we absolutely under no circumstances could have afforded a longer absense the three months put us into some serious financial trouble as it was. By God's grace alone did we make it through. We could not even get help from the church we were attending because we were new.

 

So do I... Man, am I becoming a liberal?

 

Man, what is happening? First Bro. James on the Paris thread and now you TT. :laugh:

Seriously, though, I don't look at the issue as conservative or liberal, just necessary. At only a possible $170 max a week, I seriously doubt people are going to abuse this option. For those that do really need a leave that money would really help.

 

It may be a prophetic sign that the world is ending!!! :laugh:

 

:laugh: ROFLOL!

 

I like the way you put that-- "barging."

 

I predict that the number of employed women of childbearing age will plummet. Employees will be very hesitant to hire someone that they will have to pay to not be there for 1/4 of a year. And they should. Why pay someone to not work?

 

Did you read your own article there, Salty? The bill is being introduced by Republican Thomas Morahan. You all are acting like employers are just going to have to dole out cash to these people, and that is NOT how it works. It is an insurance program, technically it is a broadenaning of the word disability, so it is not even a new insurance program. The money will come from the workers compensation system, AND employers will be allowed to extract an additional $.45 from their employees paychecks to offshoot the cost of the premium.

 

So let me see if I get this right: Now I have to pay for someone to have twelve weeks off? And children are a disability? And people still can't figure out that this is messed up?

I have no problem if some company wants to do this program. It could be a great employee benefit. It might even persuade some to work for lower wages for great benefits. But the government should not mandate. No one else should have to pay for it. And children should not be considered a disability.

I think this reveals a greater, more fundamental problem, and that is in the way that our culture views families. Children are a hassle, a trouble. Mothers don't stay home to raise their children. Families instead opt for a higher standard of living that comes with a two income family.

Here's a bombshell: God intended families to raise children, not day care centers or grandparents.

 

Pastor Larry, it is not just for mothers, this program is also for those people who need to take off work to care for a loved one, you know like my husband had to. Sheesh! there are times when people who work have to take care of their ailing loved ones and not just for the cold or flu. It is an insurance program for pity's sake, and you don't have to pay for anyone because you don't even live in New York.

 

Get off your soapbox. This is not about raising children....

 

I also am surprised that Larry doesn't consider grandparents family. I must say that my grandkids consider me family, and I consider them family.