Incoming proposal for 100% tax on welfare given to large business employees

[JennyC6]

Yeah they would, they'd just get their workforce 100% through temps that don't technically work for them.

[Gmod4ever]

Hire a bunch of people and given them hours equal to one less than the federal minimum for being considered "full-time", so they can get away with paying them reduced wages and not having to give them as many benefits. Make up for the lack of hours by simply hiring more "part-time" shifts, and end up saving a ton of money that they'd otherwise have to pay full-time employees, while still having all of the work-hours covered they need.

There are companies in my home-town that do exactly this, and all but brag about it.

It's disgusting.

[JennyC6]

Don't forget thriving on employee turnaround, ala WalMart. If you keep the conditions shitty enough, they'll quit before what benefits they do get kick in.

[nikomo]

That's not how worth works, being worth $131bil doesn't mean you have $131 billion in his bank account.
Someone's personal worth is largely a theoretical value. But massive economic inequality does still indeed exist.

This is exactly why "moderate" concern trolling within the Democrats in the US is so dangerous, you need at least one party that isn't owned by the rich. Vote the corruption out.

[Borealis]

Both parties's leadership entities are private organizations, and they choose their own members by internal vote. Can't really vote them out, though many do serve in elected positions and at the D/RNCs at the
same time.

[nikomo]

If you build an active constituency that gives a fuck, even with a private organization, corruption will get removed overtime, because corruption will build a larger and larger risk of the party being split.
Problem being that Americans are too afraid to get involved in politics in that sort of manner. If winner-takes-all was removed for congressional and house representative voting, you could kickstart the progress to moving out of a 2-party system.