In some european countries (many i'd imagine) there is some gender discrimination that results from these laws. Even though employers shouldn't (by law), they often ask whether a prospective female employee might be considering pregnancy, and it's generally just safer to go with a dude. Overall though, people aren't assholes here, and most just accept it as the cost of maintaining a civilized society.
In a weird way, this thread heartens me because I suspect the militant "anti-breeder" folks sound like complete a-holes who should never, and will never, reproduce. THANK YOU.
In a weird way, this thread heartens me because I suspect the militant "anti-breeder" folks (who sound like complete a-holes) should never, and will never, reproduce. THANK YOU.
It also brings out all the handout queens with their arms stretched out looking for other peoples money.
Again.... Some of you act like a woman just wakes up and BOOM she's pregnant.
She CHOSE to have that baby. We have condoms, pills, all sorts of way to prevent pregnancy.
Since a woman CHOOSES to become pregnant she needs to have her ducks in a row before pumping a baby down the pipeline.
Awww, its adorable when you make things up.
It also brings out all the handout queens with their arms stretched out looking for other peoples money.
amazing you failed to read this thread.
Its full of people crying they aren't getting a handout.
And for what reason? Because they choose to have a kid. They made a choice and think others should pay for it.
Just about every other nation in the world has figured out how to do it and even a few states figured it out without any sort of doom and gloom. Yet the greatest nation in the world, nope we just can't get it done. Fuck them bitches, then we get surprised that the kids grow up to be little bastards. Then again, this is America and we are number fucking one at putting people in jail, can't go fucking up our number one spot.
Just about every other nation in the world has figured out how to do it and even a few states figured it out without any sort of doom and gloom. Yet the greatest nation in the world, nope we just can't get it done. Fuck them bitches, then we get surprised that the kids grow up to be little bastards. Then again, this is America and we are number fucking one at putting people in jail, can't go fucking up our number one spot.
When you'll be single and shit out a baby you'll be crying too.
Why are you setting up strawman?
People shitting kids had many choices before shitting out that kid didn't they?
First they could have chose to not have sex.
Then they could have chosen to have unprotected sex.
The also could have chosen to have other forms of birth control.
Then given that you liberals love killing kids, err wait, you like 'choice' they could have aborted that kid.
And those are choices just related to not having a kid.
There are many more that could be made if you wanted kids.
How about being married?
How about saving money so that you could take time off when the kid is born?
Etc etc.
Yet once again you on the left just go back to that same old story. Why not have someone else pay for my shit?
Are you planning on reproducing?
Are you planning on reproducing?
Hopefully they neutered him.
ahh displays of the brilliant thinking and tolerance of the left.
Disagree with someone castrate them. You guys are pretty fucked in the head.
Are you planning on reproducing?
Why are you setting up strawman?
People shitting kids had many choices before shitting out that kid didn't they?
First they could have chose to not have sex.
Then they could have chosen to have unprotected sex.
The also could have chosen to have other forms of birth control.
Then given that you liberals love killing kids, err wait, you like 'choice' they could have aborted that kid.
And those are choices just related to not having a kid.
There are many more that could be made if you wanted kids.
How about being married?
How about saving money so that you could take time off when the kid is born?
Etc etc.
Yet once again you on the left just go back to that same old story. Why not have someone else pay for my shit?
In this thread:
People who believe that a functioning society is far less important than maximum profits for shareholders 100% of the time, because freedom.
I'm sure Benghazi can be woven in there somewhere too.
A few months of paid maternity leave is in both the societal and the mother's interest.
Yes, the short-term, bottom line can be an easier sell to the stupid and corrupt. More cost efficient and rational preventative care is often not only better for society, but for the economy as a whole....A few months of paid maternity leave is in both the societal and the mother's interest. Helping new parents adjust, breastfeed, care for kids, etc. helps them bond and reduces problems later on. Does the aphorism "an ounce of prevention is worth an ounce of cure" mean anything to you? You want a kid to get a good start out on line so he doesn't wind up being mentally crazy or a criminal later on.
But noooo you would rather pay 10 times more money later on to incarcerate or treat a kid than to pay for a couple of weeks of lousy maternity leave and facilitate parental bonding.
Economic and accrued job seniority and positions to be lost all to punish middle income or lower level families for daring to, have a family. Punish the children with unacceptable burdens that their parents are forced to endure in the highly regressive and amoral 'right-to-work' ideology of the USA.I think paid leave is great for the family but bullshit for the business. If you want to use more than your vacation time, you should quit your job and then look for a new one when you are ready to get back to work.
Explain yourself for this denigration against a more socially constructive and stable society, while lauding the great and compounding costs imposed against your society and health. Your USA that is clearly and noncompetitively behind the curb.In Canada, you get 1 year mat leave. I think that is ridiculous.
The USA is a relatively undeveloped and uncivilised regressive -- an outlier in this world of for more numerous civilised states. Yet most here are so ideologically uptight and ideologically dismissive to the costs for lacking paid leave that they destructively uphold an unsupportable pride in keeping their state down to the levels of Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, Liberia and Lesotho...The Globe and Mail
Maternity leave basics: Canada vs. the U.S.
Maternity and parental benefits provided for the birth or adoption of a baby varies wildly from country to country. The United States is part of a very exclusive group but not for the reasons you might suspect. It shares the spotlight with Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, Liberia and Lesotho as one of the only countries in the world that doesnt mandate some type of paid maternity leave for new mothers according to a study done by McGill Universitys Institute for Health and Social Policy. In fact, when compared to its northern neighbour, the U.S. maternity leave policy is embarrassingly sparse.
Here are some of the big differences between the two countries.
Canada
The Canadian government mandates both a leave and a benefits component, the latter being administered by provincial employment insurance plans. Depending on the length of employment history and the hours worked, new mothers can take between 17 and 52 weeks of leave from their jobs. Their employers are required to accept the employees back into their jobs, or the equivalent, at the end of the mandated leave at the same rate of pay with the same employment benefits.
On top of mandating maternity leave, the government offers paid leave for
one or both parents through Canadas employment insurance plan. A pregnant employee or new mother can take a paid maternity leave of up to 15 weeks. Either the mother or father can take 35 weeks of parental leave after the baby is born or adopted. The parents can share the leave however they choose. If eligible for the program, the benefits equal 55 per cent of the parents average weekly insurable wage, up to a maximum of $485 per week. For low-income families, the rate of benefits can increase to up to 80 per cent, with the same maximum of $485 per week. Employment insurance benefits are taxable in the same way as wages.
United States
In the U.S., the picture for families-to-be is very different. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) signed into law in 1993 requires employers to provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for several medical conditions, as well as the birth of a baby. If the mother has pre-birth complications, she may be able to take part of the leave under the medical component. Before the law was enacted, the U.S. had no laws requiring that employers provide any leave. There are still gaping holes in the FMLA, however. It exempts small employers, defined as those having fewer than 50 employees. Some states have their own version of the FMLA and have an even lower threshold for employer exemption.
..
The Bottom Line
The U.S. has one of the poorest support systems for pregnant women and new mothers in the world. The Canadian system, on the other hand, provides at least a partial ongoing income for almost a year to give families time to adjust to the new addition, as well as a guarantee of re-employment after a lengthy leave.
In terms of funding for a Canadian worker's EI bank, the legislation if for the employers to collect a portion of the employee's earned wages and to pass that along as that worker's EI contributions to Service Canada. The Employment Benefits entitled to that worker are based upon what they have contributed over the year before they submit for EI services.Unless it's optional for employers to pay into this then by definition it's "mandated".
In Canada, that 2.632% per $100 of wages paid by the employer to Service Canada's Employment Insurance is a legislated component and costs of an employees wage.Service Canada
3. What is EI premium rate for me [employers]?
As of January 1st, 2013,employers will pay a premium rate of $2.632 per $100 of each employee's earnings, up to the annual maximum insurable earnings of $47,400 for each employee. The maximum contribution amount of each employee is $1,247.57.
For employees working in Quebec, employers will pay a premium rate of $2.128 per $100 of each employee's earnings, up to the annual maximum insurable earnings of $47,400 for each employee. The maximum contribution amount for each employeeis $1,008.67.
4. What is the EI premium rate for my employees?
As of January 1st, 2013, for each employee, youneed to deduct $1.88 for each $100 of your employee's salary, up to the maximum insurable earnings of $47,400. The maximum contribution amount for each employee is $891.12. For your employeesworking in Quebec, you need to deduct $1.52 for each $100 of your employee'ssalary, up to the maximum insurable earnings of $47,400. The maximum contribution amount for each employee is $720.48.
SOURCE
Costs are Truly Shared by Federal and State Government
Operating as a federal-state partnership, UC is based on federal law, but administered by the states. The UC program is unique among U.S. social insurance programs in that it is funded almost totally by either federal or state taxes paid by employers.
Currently, employers pay federal unemployment taxes of 6.2 percent on the first $7,000 earned by each of their employees during a calendar year. These federal taxes are used to cover the costs of administering the UC programs in all states. In addition, the federal UC taxes pay one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provide for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits.
State UC tax rates vary from state-to-state. State UC taxes may be used only to pay benefits to unemployed workers. The state UC tax rate paid by employers is based on the state's current unemployment rate. As their unemployment rates go up, the states are required by federal law to raise the UC tax rate paid by employers.