Re:Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't co...
by closeparen on Monday November 25, 2019 @09:52PM
(#21635261)
I used to think this was bad. Now I’m not sure. The model where employers are responsible for employee well being leaves a lot to be desired:
a) The employer can always get out of the obligation by just not employing the person, reducing their hours, switching to a contractor relationship, etc. It only benefits employed people.
b) It creates pressure for everyone to be employed by a corporation, as opposed to retirement, entrepreneurship, or whatever else people might want to do.
c) It favors large employers over small ones.
If we want everyone to have something, we should provide it at public expense, not attach it as a condition of other relationships. Yes this might be “a subsidy for employers” but progressive taxation takes it from the employer’s beneficial owner anyway.
a) The employer can always get out of the obligation by just not employing the person, reducing their hours, switching to a contractor relationship, etc. It only benefits employed people.
b) It creates pressure for everyone to be employed by a corporation, as opposed to retirement, entrepreneurship, or whatever else people might want to do.
c) It favors large employers over small ones.
If we want everyone to have something, we should provide it at public expense, not attach it as a condition of other relationships. Yes this might be “a subsidy for employers” but progressive taxation takes it from the employer’s beneficial owner anyway.