A state Senate committee yesterday passed a bill "Establishing family and medical leave insurance". Today's Seattle Times has the story:
all workers would be entitled to up to five weeks of paid family leave per year. They could use it to stay home with a newborn baby or newly adopted child, to care for a sick relative or domestic partner, or as personal sick leave.Polls show "widespread support for the legislation". No surprise. Who would say no to getting something for nothing?Payments would be capped initially at $250 per week, a figure that would grow with inflation. To cover the benefits, the state would impose a payroll tax of 2 cents an hour per employee -- about $40 per year.
As a self-employed home-based businessman I look forward to boosting my income by $1,250 a year without having to do any more work.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 06, 2007 11:20 AM | Email ThisAnother regressive DEMOCRAT tax for the state of Washington. Minimum wage employees will be paying a far higher percentage of their income in taxes, than will software engineers.
I guess the Democrats will cover the deficiency by increasing the regressive payroll tax to 10 cents per hour or even 25 cents per hour, if necessary.
Posted by: Richard Pope on March 6, 2007 11:32 AMThe poor will stay poor- unmarried/divorced and have tons of kids out of wedlock who will also grow up to be poor and having more kids out of wedlock.
At least they will have family leave with that minimum wage job.
Posted by: Andy on March 6, 2007 11:33 AMReal illness is certainly one thing; but with more people deciding be 'be sick' to make a buck, productivity is going to suffer in this state. This dem legislature is killing this state.
Posted by: Michele on March 6, 2007 11:58 AMIf the working poor were somehow "excused" from the tax, it would not be "fair" to them: it would be "favorable" to them. Liberals and conservatives tend to mis-use the term "fair."
1. The problem for many small businesses, cost aside, is they can't afford to have too many kep people on extended leave, it affects productivity.
Is productivity expected to go down? If productivity goes down does this affect tax receipts for the state and ultimately make current budget projections unsustainable?
2. No one is ever going to come out and say to a person I am not going to hire you because you are in the childbearing age unless they are very stupid. Will this affect the ability of young women to be hired by small businesses. Studies have shown that men typically do not take advantage of parental leave because they fear the consequences.
Can anyone anticipate some of the unintended consequences?
Posted by: WVH on March 6, 2007 12:16 PMMake the state payroll tax $7.00 per hour, and minimum wage workers will have virtually nothing left after paying state payroll state and social security/medicaid. But high income workers will be paying only a small percentage of their income.
And it would be even more "fair" to eliminate all state sales taxes, property taxes, B&O taxes, gasoline taxes, vehicle taxes, unemployment taxes, etc. and replace them with a $7.00 per hour payroll tax, to be deducted from employee wages.
LIBERTARIAN principles are even more screwed up than DEMOCRAT principles.
Posted by: Richard Pope on March 6, 2007 12:20 PMSo, under YOUR logic, if two individuals are the same age and have the same health history, and they both wish to purchase life insurance at the same policy beneit level, from the same insurance company, the price each pays should be based on what their salaries and wages are??
If they go out to dinner and each enjoy a filet, should one pay more because he makes more? Are you advocating socialism and the re-distributio of wealth here? If so, you're in the wrong place. Try www.horsesass.org. They're more in tune with your ideals.
Posted by: Libertarian on March 6, 2007 12:28 PM1. Some of us are good independents.
2. You had better be worried not only about the
potential consequences of this bill and its
affect on the ability of the state to meet
future expense needs especially if state
revenue falls short of projections.
3. There are enough questionable acts by
questionable people of both parties. I tend
to agree with commentators who call the
Clintons the grifters in chief. I don't excuse
Libby, this is not the thread for the
discussion.
4. Do you have the ability to chew gum and walk at
at the same time?
Quote: But Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner of Kirkland, director of MomsRising.org, a new national women's advocacy group, said the United States is one of the few industrialized countries that does not require paid family leave.
"It's a national embarrassment," she said. Unquote
So, the US is one of the few industrialized countries that doesn't steal from its citizens by requiring, under threat of law, paid family leave. Well, good on the US, and I hope it continues such citizen-friendly behavior.
It appears that Ms Rowe-Finkbeiner has some very odd notions as to what constitutes embarassing behavior.
Quote: Some lawmakers have suggested sending the issue to voters as a referendum. But Sen. Karen Keiser, the prime sponsor in the Senate, said she thinks the Legislature needs to pass the law on its own.
"It's our job to show leadership," said Keiser, D-Kent. Unquote
When two thugs mug someone, which one shows leadership - the one that roughs the victim up, or the one that steals his wallet?
Posted by: ewaggin on March 6, 2007 12:33 PMI was doing this when I gave two weeks of sick leave. Five weeks? Wow!!!
Do people really think that people won't use that medical leave provision if it were available? Of course, if you abuse it in my job, I'll find a way to 'boot' you out.
2 cents/hour? What a joke!!
Posted by: swatter on March 6, 2007 12:33 PMIf I had a name like "Rowe-Finkbeiner," I'd consider THAT a national embarassment!
Labor economics is not my field, but I have a real concern. My interest is in educating low income children, particularly low-income children of color. Many of these kids live in single parent homes headed by a woman of child-bearding age and many of these women do not live in Redmond. Five weeks leave sounds great, but not if it means that many of these women will not be considered as employable by the very businesses that are likely to give them a start. Any posters spend any time in France? Then you are aware that many businesses there are reluctant to hire because of labor regs. Too often, people are the bottom are not really helped by these bills.
"Optional Moms" like Rowe-Finkebeiner are the ones that are helped. The women's movement really didn't relieve a lot of the challenges faced by pink collar women, but "liberated" upperclass women from their perceived restrictions.
The women's movement really didn't relieve a lot of the challenges faced by pink collar women, but "liberated" upperclass women from their perceived restrictions.
=====
For once I agree with you!
Posted by: Libertarian on March 6, 2007 01:40 PM"For once I agree with you!"
I guess I'll have to take to my bed with the vapors.
Posted by: WVH on March 6, 2007 01:44 PMAs a self-employed person (I am one as well!), you should KNOW that state employee laws - like L&I, unemployment, and other benefits - don't apply to YOU. YOU'RE exempt.
After all, we're "THE MAN" and need to be kept down so we can pay for other people (employees). Never mind that if WE don't succeed there aren't any employees (or service providers, like lawyers, CPAs, marketing firms, etc.).
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on March 6, 2007 03:50 PMAt least the state will pay the 5 weeks leave (which I suspect will end up with some businesses dropping their own leave policies) and thus the state will get hit with the consequences of this one.
Posted by: My Boaz's Ruth on March 6, 2007 04:42 PMSo what are the implications of this bad boy? I think that replacement workers will become more popular. Workers that use this will eventually find themselves out of a job. When the time to cut comes, your name will be at the top of the list. The people that a company can depend on to be there when needed will be closer to the bottom of the list. Simple as that. Businesses will now take a second look at locating in Washington state. Boeing's slow migration to other states, which was halted somewhat, will once again start. The smaller their presence here the more competitive they will be in a world-wide market. And speaking of world-wide markets, if you think that outsourcing is bad now, this will only make it smarter to locate somewhere else than here.
France and Germany already have these types of plans and they have 10 percent + chronic unemployment. We are only following their lead.
I wonder how single people like to pay for others to have kids? That's another aspect of this. Every teenager and 20 something will be paying for something they don't get any benefit from. They will pay hundreds of times the cost of this before they get into a position to use it. I wonder how they feel about that?
I'm waiting for the time when the funds don't match the out go. Then it will be tax-raising time in the clubhouse.
I see that you got your hood and robe back from the cleaners. Isn't "stupid" the correct spelling?
I would have to spot you a minimum of 50 IQ points so that I could in honesty call you clueless.
BTW, My Boaz's Ruth, the tax is on the employer who must collect and forward to the state, but the employer may deduct the $0.02/hour from the employee's paycheck, so in reality it's a tax on employees.
Posted by: Obi-Wan on March 6, 2007 06:26 PMOne of the most basic expressions of freedom is a citizens ability to enter into a contract, naming their own terms. Legislation like this says, "We don't trust grownups to negotiate their own employment contracts, therefore, we need to step in and help all those idiots we care so much about. They should be thanking Goddess us sophisticates are looking out for them." It's anti-freedom and anti-capitalist. It's proof that liberalism is the philosophy of perpetual adolescence.
It's anti-common sense, too. We have the whole rotten corpse of world wide socialism to study the impact of this type of absurdity. Following the Eutopian version of worker's paradise is like looking at a room full of people dying of cancer, and saying, "Man. I'm the only person here who hasn't started smoking yet. I'm so un-cool!! I need to get puffing!"
Posted by: Orrin Johnson on March 6, 2007 10:52 PMcontinual chipping away at business--the "bad bogeyman" entity that, (ahem), just happens to give us jobs & tax revenues! anyone remember the golden goose fable?
we are creeping to Euro standards. i heard Rowe- Finkbeiner's arguments on the radio. mostly emotion. a real chatterbox. pretty light substance. very feel-good. not rooted in business acumen or business experience sense. when pinned down, it was all about "fairness" and "the rest of the world does this" so we also have to be "enlightened." some reasoning. if the rest of the world tolerates 70+% tax rates, should we also? i didnt hear if she ever ran a business.
WVH nailed the implication at his 9.2--this will cause subtle hiring changes and adversely affect the people most in need of protection. just watch. and--more business costs. more reasons to tighten budgets and LAY OFF people! a boomerang effect.
i wonder if these bene's are also available for illegal aliens? after all, like my local WA legislator once said, "...it's the right thing to do..."
lastly, it's always the "only a few cents a gallon" or "few dollars a year" argument. sure--only a few drips of rain later--(COMBINED)--and levees finally break. when did "only a few cents" ever get REDUCED by a taxing entity?!
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on March 7, 2007 05:02 AM
Are they out of their minds. Just look at how many people in France & Germany who can't find jobs.
Heck look at Air Bust problems. They need to lay off thousands and goverment keeps pumping more money into a dying idea.
We really want to follow their ideas?
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 7, 2007 06:47 AMPlease take this question in the good spirit in which it is offered. Obviously I hope you answer in the negative!
"As a self-employed home-based businessman I look forward to boosting my income by $1,250 a year without having to do any more work"
Since you are self-employed, you wouldn't be posting anything on your site that was contrary to the interests of your customers/clients.
Does any of your income come from local governments, or entities that make money off of local governments?
TIA for any response you care to give about this.
Posted by: disclosure rocks on March 7, 2007 10:12 AMFirst, I really am a she. I went to Rowe- Finkbeiner's web site. I have never heard her speak. In my opinion, she is what Stephen Sondheim characterized in an earlier time as a "lady who lunches" or a woman that in an earlier time lunched and did teas, now they do web sites and sponsor "movements." Having spent some time in Europe, all these regs do is change the structure of the employment market. Employment lawyers will figure out a way around these regs. It will probably involve more independent contractors, more contract workers, and use of more temp agencies like Volt and Kelly. Fewer people will be offered real employment. Last year when French University students rioted over De Villipan's attempt to change the life-time employment system, even though only a percentage of them would ever be offered jobs, they rioted in an economy where most business people want to leave. Part of the reason for the immigrant riots in France is that few will ever get jobs because French employers are reluctant to hire full time and generally do a series of temp contracts. Businesses here that don't want to pay this benefit will lawyer up and find ways to avoid paying. The group that suffers are low-income women and those seeking a full time job with benefits. I wonder how many of the sponsors work for universities, non-profits or other entities where the true cost does not affect the able to compete, because their entity doesn't have to compete in the market place?
Posted by: WVH on March 7, 2007 11:45 AMyes--i fear a "Euro-ization of America." bit by bit--loss of national pride. taxes rising up the kazoo. everyone a victim sub-group with "rights" and NO COMMON AMERICAN UNITY. apathetic citizens ready to be taken over by more agressive threats & ideals & religions.
no one rolling up sleeves anymore and cleaning toilets, washing dishes & bussing tables to learn how the work ethic ACTUALLY works early in their careers.
dont even start with the lack of simple world knowledge of an inquisitive/analytical mind that has read any of The Classics for cultural and historical references applicable to life now.
i recommend mandatory summer work for all kids on a farm as part of "school." bust your butt. bale hay. learn responsibility for animals. learn about something relying on YOU for their life.
soapbox over.
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on March 7, 2007 05:40 PMNo insult taken, the pajamahadeen of both genders serve a role that the old media is unwilling to perform which is asking questions and generally trying to light a fire under the establishment.
Unless people with values get off their collective butts, the next stage in 2008 is a lot of the social policies that have brought Europe to ruin. I am an independent, but I want someone who is willing to support most of my values, otherwise I will continue to vote for Nader. I will not vote for Hillary or Obama, although I am glad that he is running, because they are secular progressive socialists. I know that one of the moonbats will counter with their church membership. But, I believe that both support abortion and same sex marriage. I know that Rudi supports abortion and the Catholic Newsmagazine have urged people not to support him. I would vote for a ticket of Rudi and Michael Steele, the former senate candidate from Maryland.
In your dreams, unless you are a rock star.
Posted by: WVH on March 8, 2007 12:15 AM