DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Un-paid Leave for new Mothers

As it stands now, the employer isn't paying for any of that, the customer is as it is all built into the cost of the goods and services they sell.... however, I would be perfectly fine with a company not providing paid sick days or paid vacation days or medical insurance or retirement.. I'm perfectly fine with that. Just take the person who makes $25/hour and pay them $45/hour and the company will no longer have to pay for any of that other stuff, they can take care of it on their own.

I am surprised that insurance companies don't offer some sort of coverage for pregnancy inside their disability insurance policies. (and they may, for all I know)

This would seem to be the best solution. If you are unable to work because of your pregnancy, you collect on your disability insurance policy. If you elected h=not to take that particular coverage, then that's on you.

Either that or have women pay into a federal program from the time they are 18 till 45 or so, and have that go to a pregnancy benefit fund, which would cover a woman while she is off having her baby.

This country simply cannot afford to just keep throwing benefits at people for which we have no means of paying for them though. Our federal deficit is exploding, and one of these days our currency is going to be completely worthless. Think the rich have it good now? Wait will US currency is worthless, and the rich in the US have largely divested themselves of US currency in favor of whatever the strongest currency at the time is.

Then some would come forward and complain that men are as responsible for pregnancy as the women, and men would then begin paying, then those that decide to not, or can not, have children complain because they are paying for a benefit they will never use.

Too many variables, hence why any government intervention just creates as many problems as it tries to solve.

That is how it is handled generally; as an employee tax. There are short-term disability plans you can look into but insurance companies don't *have* to give you one.



As long as the maternity leave is paid for by workers, how does it affect the government or the deficit?

This is such a folly. If the state and fed governments had a press meeting and decided today to stop funding and providing any road or highway maintenance, and leave it up to the people, how would that be a good thing? Would you be up to working an additional 20 hours a week or more to maintain your strip of road? What if your neighbor is a deadbeat and lets his turn to dirt? How would you get to work? How would you get your kids to school?

Why do we think the government is useless for everything including infrastructure?

Our roads benefit everyone, including those without cars, bikes, because without the roads you probably don't get electricity, water, emergency services etc. And in general those are paid for by usage taxes (gas tax, tolls).

And in what way do you, me, and everyone on this planet not benefit from mothers?

Additionally you have proven yourself incorrect because you could not provide me by which the government would ruin our roads versus people maintaining them by themselves.

Hmm, look around at our roads and infrastructure, states and municipalities waiting for government funding to fix them. So they aren't do an exemplary job anyway.

But if you truly believe there is a connection between maternity pay/leave and road maintenance, then have at it.

Show me an outline showing how it would be so much better if we had no government oversight for the roads



There is, it's a benefit. No roads would severely limit our economy. Not making babies would also hurt our economy. Prove to me that these are both false.

The state of North Carolina spends almost $4 billion a year on road and bridge construction and maintenance and that doesn't count what individual counties, cities, and towns spend...

That one was premature, but only by 5 weeks. I had put in for 2 weeks vacation with my company, and she had the unpaid maternity leave. Luckily, he was the biggest kid in the NICU, so it wasn't that scary.

If my wife had made more money than me, I guess I would have quit work or set up telecommuting with my company. I could have done that, and I honestly would have preferred to telecommute.

What I also said is that there should be some option for paid maternity leave that you can pay into before getting pregnant. That way, you still have a paycheck coming in while you are forced out of work. After that, you have to deal with what you have or become a slave to government paperwork and benefits.

Most people don't look for new options and want someone else to pay for their lack of preparation.

I never said the government would ruin our roads. but that's neither here nor there.

You guys can continue your talk on road construction in a maternity leave thread. Have at it.

i didn't say that though

Yeah, the downside to the quick reply is that it attributes it as a reply to the OP.

I agree with this; if the idea was to pay for maternity leave out of some random fund it wouldn't make sense to me. The simplest measure is as an employment tax and would integrate cleanly into what is already there. And we could make it optional to a point. Kinda like how there are exemptions into Social Security, but it's paid out by the employee in general.

It was a play on your general comment that



It's a common conservative comment, and in many ways I agree with it but it is not black and white! I used roads as an example. Should I use the penal system? Should you and I be left to manage sentencing of murderers and rapists?

Seriously though, we all benefit from mothers. Every last one of us. Treating a pregnancy as a medical procedure or calling in sick is not the right way to go about it.

I would much rather prefer it's done through a private insurance and not through the government. The government will take that money to use for something else, or ration that care instead of paying out what you put in. Before you know it, the government would be paying maternity leave to illegal immigrants or welfare mothers that don't work and don't need it. That's part of the reason I never wanted obummercare in the first place.

Some people just call these savings accounts.

The savings account idea on it's face sounds logical, but if everyone waited until they were financially able to take the time off they need then our birth rates would be disastrous. They are already pretty bad because millenials are waiting as long as they can before having kids. My wife and I had our first one when we were both 30. Her mom was 18 years old and my mom was 24 with her and I respectively.

We actually need more babies being born to support the economy as we know it. US birth rates are at historic lows. Paid maternity leave would go a long way to fixing this problem.

We're growing at a rate where we could easily see over population within the next decade or so. We don't need more children.

Actually, I got the idea from medical savings plans. Instead of buying insurance through a private company, if a person was to put that money into an interest bearing savings account, they would have that money available. It would take a lot of personal responsibility, but that has been the conservative/liberal argument for a long time. If the money can only be used for medical purposes, the account would stay in place through good times and bad.

That's a savings account and those already exist.

Having a child is a financial hardship for almost everybody, not many are financially ready for it.. but yet most of them get through it ok, adjust their lifestyle, and move on.. and then for some unexplained reason, many choose to do it again.

Business doesn't care as much about overpopulation as it does ensuring it has consumers of product. Fewer humans means fewer consumers. Encouraging people to have babies is pro business

I agree with your overall statement but find it lacking in the context of supporting paid maternity leave.

What happens if you don't have enough money to cover your medical expenses? I had Guillain-Barré Syndrome and if I didn't have medical insurance I would have easily been 130-150k in debt.

What about premature children, it is very very expensive for premature babies to get the care that they need in order to survive. It sounds good on paper but I don't think its realistic.

Nnn

Supposedly, under Obama Care there should be no folks without medical coverage.

Lol not to mention they are only allowed to have one child. Period or abortions will be forced on the women but they have it so much better? LMAO the ignorance.

You want to have children then I think its great but its up to you to plan for them and take care of them and yourself not your job. Your husband should be there to take care of you. If your pregnant outside of marriage then suffer the consequences of your actions don't ask your boss to bail you out. His responsibility is to pay you only for the work you do and not to take care of your personal problems. You always have the option of keep your darn pants on

Huu

Really???????? You mean that's an option?

Remember ladies! If you are raped, you always had the option of keeping your darn pants on!

and remember, according to one politician, your body shuts down while getting raped, so there's no way you could get pregnant!!

that means if you get pregnant, you wanted it!

In my opinion, that is what medical insurance should be for... not to pay for your well child check up, you should pay for that... not for your one time prescription of penicillin, you should pay for that...

One of the reasons insurance costs are so high is because we have first-cost insurance, meaning they pay almost every dime of anything deemed "healthcare" from the first dime to the last dime... my wife can get a massage on our healthcare because it is stress related... psychological care because you can't stop eating donuts, insurance will pay it. Got a cold? Go to the doctor and bill the insurance company a couple hundred bucks even though there is NOTHING the doctor can do about a cold... of course the doctor won't admit there is nothing they can do about it so they will write you an $80 prescription for something and insurance will pay almost all of that too... and in the end, the cold will go away on its own if you get some rest...

The subject had nothing to do with rape but i love how you go to an extreme to justify a sliding scale that just leads to another extreme.

Realistically we know that anyone raped will have an abortion. No one on this forum would blame them including me. My cousin Elizabeth was raped by a gang and to her the only good thing that came from it was the child she decided to keep and raise. She did not ask for handouts and worked her butt off to raise the child as a single mother. So, using her as an example, a real one, the right thing can always be accomplished even if it's painful. The child is always innocent regardless of how it came to be created.

Shrug, to me you went there first jumping to the extreme that all of these problems will magically fix themselves if women don't have sex. Even if we lived in an ideal Christian world where everyone was married and having kids to God (who btw supports as much procreation as one possibly can), there would still be the issue of the economy, and how families make do within that. No family is the same and not every family has the capability to have the wife just not work anymore or have the wife return to a job after being off work without pay for 12 weeks. So the "answer" right now is have the mother go back to work ASAP.

We live in the most powerful country on earth, yet treat our new mothers the worst.

You can easily not have sex if you can't afford the children you would make from it. I did just fine waiting for marriage. The fact that some people can't control themselves is their problem, not mine.

People can easily afford to live on one person's income when you stop wasting so much money on entertainment and tons of "stuff."

If you can't afford to have children then you shouldn't be trying to make them. It's your own responsibility to raise your family, not mine.

That's the problem with this generation is that people always want someone else to take care of them instead of doing it themselves. It's always someone else's fault.

Well no, it's not. YOU do the deed then YOU pay for it. If you can't raise yourself above that of an animal and control your urges then go live like one.

That's caused senility. I believe it's caused by children.

This still doesn't help because just because your married doesn't mean you're making 90k a year and can afford the wife to just *stay home.* This isn't about the ethics of child birth or single mothers alone. Plenty of married folk have trouble caring for new kids too. Would you prefer they go on birth control? Many religions including Baptists believe that you should not have birth control but you should procreate as much as possible.



Snort. I have good friends working as EMTs, Cops, Firefighters, and other worthwhile jobs still living with mom and pop because their pay alone doesn't cut it. They could probably live in their own place if they were married and had a working wife, but what does the wife do when she becomes pregnant? She can't take time off because they couldn't just live on this one guys salary. Don't assume that your salary is everyones salary.



This isn't about affording children, this is about the importance of bonding time for new parents, especially mothers, as they bring the next generation into this world. Many families have to send their kids to daycare to continue to work 2 or 3 job households to make ends meet, but you're suggestion is that the Mother should

Have a Kid on Friday
Be Back to work by Monday

And that the United States being only as good as Lesotho and Papua New Guinea is "just fine."





Nice ad hominem attack comparing women to animals. Keep it classy man...

Man razor. You and others keep calling yourselves Christians, but you sound anything but.

[quote=Razorthorns]You can easily not have sex if you can't afford the children you would make from it. I did just fine waiting for marriage. The fact that some people can't control themselves is their problem, not mine.

People can easily afford to live on one person's income when you stop wasting so much money on entertainment and tons of "stuff."

If you can't afford to have children then you shouldn't be trying to make them. It's your own responsibility to raise your family, not mine.

That's the problem with this generation is that people always want someone else to take care of them instead of doing it themselves. It's always someone else's fault.


Not to derail this topic.....But.....I think we all know if you WAIT till you can afford kids NONE of us would ever have any...... Carry on.....

You don't wait until you have all of the cash on hand.. but waiting until you are established in a job, live in a relatively safe place big enough for a child, have reliable transportation and have at least a few bucks in the bank in case of an emergency isn't asking too much.

I would add that you should have a sound relationship with your partner as well...after all...they WILL be a part of your life for a very long time.

And the parents need to own up to that responsibility and plan for it. If no income is forthcoming during that time, then they need to plan for it...or not make it happen.

I simply don't care what other countries are doing in this regard.

I agree with that. My point was, some people I've talked with, start out by saying: We won't have kids until we can afford them. You'll never FEEL like you can afford them if your waiting on the money...unless you win the loto. All the rest is just common sense. Maybe thats the problem