2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

There's a huge piece that folks don't seem to be getting...this program will help anyone who has a family member -- your spouse gets into a car accident, your elderly mother breaks her leg, your sibling gets some really bad news from the doctor. It's there for everyone...

As for the piece about not wanting to pay for children -- the more we invest in children and their well-being today, the better our society will be in the long run. We can live in an individualistic box, living only for ourselves, and expect everything to be OK in the long run. Social security, medicare, the health of our economy -- it all depends on how well today's children are cared for.

One more thing -- it ends up being more expensive for a society to NOT have paid family leave -- emergency services, bankruptcy, poor health for children -- these are all incredibly expensive realities for our economy. Mitigating these, providing programs that prevent these, is an incredibly wise investment to make.

posted 4 years, 1 month ago
view in context

The guest that says that one can plan for every eventuality is not being realistic...there are many ways in which families who plan and plan and plan cannot be prepared for a debilitating illness for a relative that makes it so that an individual cannot work.

To say that this is for higher wage workers is a true and absolute falsehood. In fact, the people who will use this are those who need it most-- the low wage workers who have fewer resources, less credit and less of an ability to fudge their budgets.

posted 4 years, 1 month ago
view in context