3 ms·
You make a good point though, in an ideal world[0] the next step might be the government stepping up to provide something like this to everyone. Remember that w
by smcl 7y ago
You make a good point though, in an ideal world[0] the next step might be the government stepping up to provide something like this to everyone. Remember that what the government is "paying" here (or rather waiving) is the tax on that, not the entire amount (so I dunno, $9 instead of $90). The government here isn't spectacularly wealthy though so I don't know if they'd be able to fund the full amount without raising taxes, which would be a tough sell.
[0] = my idea of an ideal world is very subjective so might not match up with everyone else's!
- neltnerb 7y agoYeah, I assume trying to convince people to change will run into roadblocks. Of course the solution seems like the same as getting publicly funded healthcare in the US -- raise taxes by an amount that offsets the benefit, people with higher pay take a small loss while people who are unemployed or low income get stable help buying food. Definitely not recommending fighting over that given the stakes, I assume unemployed people get reasonably generous government funded assistance with paying for food? As long as that's the case it just seems... odd... but not that strange, my partner works for GrubHub and gets a weekly benefit to subsidize personal meals. But the US has a totally different attitude about how employers should support employees so it doesn't really stand out here at all.