4 ms·

Life necessities became tied to permanent employment because of income and tax policy, not some corporate desire to control heath-care.

by Digory 7y ago

zanny 7y ago
The tax code is totally corporate dictated and to their interests - the huge bias against self employment is evident of that, whereas in a more competent economy policymakers would acknowledge the strong growth potential of incentivizing small business creation.
- Digory 7y ago
  This was policy makers dictating to corporations, not the other way. It was a product of (1) intense focus on wage freezes during the labor shortage of World War II, and (2) the growth of unions, which focused on winning concessions from management, not government.[0] I agree it's a terrible policy. Corporate management now accepts and exploits it. But it was not a decision by 'capital' to spite labor or self-employment. It is the consequence of 'progressive' tax, regulation and labor policy. [0]http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/67493CA6B837EDF285257B160048DD49?OpenDocument http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/67493CA6B8...
mathw 7y ago
No, it's because of a political decision. In the UK, you get healthcare regardless of your employment status or insurance cover. You don't get somewhere to live without a source of income, and our benefits system is being systematically shredded by a government ideologically opposed to the very concept (currently campaigning for tomorrow's election on a variety of lovely talking points like "poor people are just stupider" and "disabled people shouldn't have to be paid the minimum wage because they don't understand money"), but for the time being at least we have healthcare for all paid for by general taxation. We should have housing and food for all as well, but I'm not sure anybody's seriously looked into how to do that.

4 ms·

Life necessities became tied to permanent employment because of income and tax policy, not some corporate desire to control heath-care.

by Digory 7y ago

Life necessities became tied to permanent employment because of income and tax policy, not some corporate desire to control heath-care.

zanny 7y ago
The tax code is totally corporate dictated and to their interests - the huge bias against self employment is evident of that, whereas in a more competent economy policymakers would acknowledge the strong growth potential of incentivizing small business creation.
- Digory 7y ago
  This was policy makers dictating to corporations, not the other way. It was a product of (1) intense focus on wage freezes during the labor shortage of World War II, and (2) the growth of unions, which focused on winning concessions from management, not government.[0] I agree it's a terrible policy. Corporate management now accepts and exploits it. But it was not a decision by 'capital' to spite labor or self-employment. It is the consequence of 'progressive' tax, regulation and labor policy. [0]http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/67493CA6B837EDF285257B160048DD49?OpenDocument http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/67493CA6B8...
mathw 7y ago
No, it's because of a political decision. In the UK, you get healthcare regardless of your employment status or insurance cover. You don't get somewhere to live without a source of income, and our benefits system is being systematically shredded by a government ideologically opposed to the very concept (currently campaigning for tomorrow's election on a variety of lovely talking points like "poor people are just stupider" and "disabled people shouldn't have to be paid the minimum wage because they don't understand money"), but for the time being at least we have healthcare for all paid for by general taxation. We should have housing and food for all as well, but I'm not sure anybody's seriously looked into how to do that.