Comments for Paid sick leave is bad for workers at http://tracypress.com , comment 1 to 10 out of 10 comments http://tracypress.com Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:58:03 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-55217 Without Unions there would be no middle class or middle upper class, blue collar whatever you want to call it. People are not slaves, did I mention that! How are we to consume with slave wages? You what us to eat only bread and water and bow to the master and say thank you while you reap all the wealth on our backs? And you employers from other Countries, stop and think about why you came to America in the first place and it's not because we have slaves here. Think about it, That's all - kchapman Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:21:31 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-55137 BRAVO Bar Fann!!!!!!! My hackles raised with the first sentences. Glad I read on! - badattitude Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:45:45 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-55103 Bar Fann: Now that's funny, although I have to admit they shouldn't be because your sarcastic points are obvious to anyone with a heart and a mind :-) - MarkDavis Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:39:50 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-55102 Our nation will never rise above the detritus unless it abolishes laws governing employer behavior. None of the great nations regulate this stuff. Look at places like, um, like Chad, or the Congo, or Sri Lanka. Even China, which has laws, but doesn't bother toenforce them. These countries rank among the greatest countries in the world, the freest countries in the world, because their people are free to make their own choices, without unfair interference by the government. How will we ever catch up to the Congo unless we too adopt complete and total freedom of contract for employees and employers? We will forever be relegated to the backwaters of the world, stuck in the doldroms with other crappy places like Canada, until we abolish burdensome regulations that are holding us back. - Bar Fann Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:19:45 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-55101 "however, in a free society employers can hire people for whatever they want and employees, who own their labor, can chose to work for a person or not." Scott is absolutely correct. Why would government get involved in employment decisions? Look at all the bad things that have happened in this country since government started regulating working conditions. If people want to work in a clock painting radium dials, why should the government stop it? If children want to work for puny wages seven days a week, tying knots in rugs or mining diamonds or yellowcake, who is the nanny government to say that is bad? There is a totally insane law in this state that says that EMPLOYERS ARE REQUIRED TO PAY WORKERS THE WAGES THAT THEY EARN, and we actually use the criminal laws (not contract laws) to enforce this odious requirement. Can you believe how outrageous that is? In a truly free market, employers should choose whether or not to pay their employees, and if the employees don't like the employers decision, they could always leave. I am sure Scott could come up with thousands of other similar government regulations that really interfere with freedom of employment contracts in this country, laws against sexual harassment (in a truly free market, an employer SHOULD be able to force female employees to have sex with the boss in order to keep their jobs), I could go on. - Bar Fann Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:19:27 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-55038 Scott is wrong about the rule of law. The rule of law simply means that there is due process and that arbitrary decision-making by those in power is not done. What Scott wants is simply less regulation of business. Fair enough, but let's not tie it to concepts incorrectly. - MarkDavis Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:30:17 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-54421 I know freedom is no longer much of a consideration. however, in a free society employers can hire people for whatever they want and employees, who own their labor, can chose to work for a person or not. When both agree to the terms, they form a contract of employment. When someone no longer likes the terms, the employer can fire the employee, or the employee can quit. There is no force or compulsion. When governments interfere with contracts, they interfere with freedom in an unfair way by helping one to the detriment of the other. This is contrary to the rule of law where the government should just stay out of it and treat both parties the same. - shurban Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:43:06 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-54392 Benefits is one thing, but why should you get paid if you are not there? Benefits for nothing sounds like union rhetoric! - solar_biscuit Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:29:08 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-54338 People are not slaves They deserve decent benefits for there work. - kchapman Sun, 20 Jul 2008 07:19:33 +0100 http://tracypress.com/content/view/15276/2244/#comment-54154 Gov't should not have to make laws which businesses should institue on their own. Businesses should treat their employees the way they would want to be treated (?). Would you want to work for an employer who does not provide paid sick leave? If you provide better benefits, you will attract better employees, who in turn will produce a better product. Yes, the effect to the economny is that prices increase. Everyone pays more for goods and services. If all businesses provide paid sick leave, all costs will go up. Consumers will pay wherever they turn. As a consumer, I'm willing to pay more for such benefits. If I don't pay as a consumer of this product, I will pay as a consumer of health benefits, etc; and I will pay as a taxpayer. People must face the fact that all goods and services are going up. - baritvc Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:21:17 +0100