Originally Posted by Nightshade

:lol:

Ok I see what you are saying but I think the problem there is that not everyone is able to save money since they are living from check to check etc.

Yeah I hear the argument now, "can't afford it don't get knocked up" but that is unrealistic because these things happen.

I think one of the things this program is working to eliminate is say someone gets into an accident and a member of the family needs to care for them for a time. Well even if they have money saved up for such a case there is really no guarantee that they have a job when they get back....this helps guarantee they have a job when they return.

Using pregnancy as an example for this type of policy is a very bad choice of examples btw.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

:lol:


Using pregnancy as an example for this type of policy is a very bad choice of examples btw.

Originally Posted by /^Blackmagik^\

the problem with this it that most companies have an emergency leave system already in place which they get tax breaks for. seems a bit redundant and an increased burden on the taxpayer.:down:

Originally Posted by LiLRexen

sure..McDonalds and Burger King are very well known for their support of sick people and new mothers.

Originally Posted by LiLRexen

I think pregnancy is an excellent choice. It's attitudes like his that makes a program like that a necessity. Remember the saying "it takes a village to raise a child"? Well, its true. In other cultures its also still a fact of life. The family and friends and neighbors gather around to help the new mother or the sick person in their time of need. In the US most people say "it's their f'ing problem, they should have planned for it". Well now Big Brother has to step in and force us to do whats right...again.