In one hand, voluntary unemployment funded by taxes seems unfair.
On the other, fuck the man. The wealth imbalance needs to be fixed and this is a step in the correct direction.
Unfair how? It's paid by employers, so kinda makes sense to me, i.e. employer caused the loss of livelihood, so they pay for the benefit to the recently unemployed.
The employer is, presumably, willing to pay them to work, just not at the rate the workers want.
I'm not in or from the US, but I'm guessing unemployment doesn't pay enough to live the good life? Should just be enough to keep you alive?
If you want to leave you shouldn't worry about starving in the pursuit of better employment imo
Unemployment probably won't even cover your bills, but will let you hemorrhage money slower
Then I really don't see the issue. Not like people would willingly put themselves in that kind of situation without a reason
In the US if you want to leave your job, you won’t get unemployment. If you’re laid off you can.
I agree with you that it’s wrong, but that’s how it currently works in the US.
Unemployment is not for when people decide to leave a job. It’s for when your employer lays you off. Going on strike is much different than being laid off.
Is he gonna drop the ball on this like he did on universal healthcare?
Let's wait and see
SB-799 give Strikers the right to receive unemployment
What the hell is that website? It screams very anti-choice.
You would think? Shockingly nothing in this site talks about pro or anti choice. Mostly talks about anti austery, paid leave, yimby stuff, WFH, etc
This user always posts from that website. It seems primarily aimed at criticizing austerity measures but it’s super bizarre. No mention of who is actually putting this research together.
Like I agree that austerity measures suck and that if you want a family you should be able to afford one, but phrasing it as “stop population decline” is just… weird? Like the examples aren’t bad exactly but the entire presentation and motivations behind the website sets off some serious red flags.
Saw it on Reddit and Google News, and ended up finding my self posting from it over and over
Totally fine not trying to say you’re up to something nefarious haha. Just saying that a source I only see from one user that itself is pretty opaque about sourcing and intent makes me approach it cautiously.
Don't get me wrong, I like posting from this site in part the name raise eyebrows despite the articles being shocking reliable
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News