The blueprint for prosperity

[WinterBorn]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

 

[WinterBorn]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

 

[danielpalos]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

Quite a reworking of that policy. UC's original mission is too limited and merely needs to be expanded to cover our economic problems.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

And employees are free to quit at any time. That is equality.

 

[WinterBorn]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

Quite a reworking of that policy. UC's original mission is too limited and merely needs to be expanded to cover our economic problems.

So the UC you want will be used to give an income to citizens who cannot work and those who choose not to work?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

And employees are free to quit at any time. That is equality.

Equality is equal protection of the law for UC. That is equality.

 

[danielpalos]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

Quite a reworking of that policy. UC's original mission is too limited and merely needs to be expanded to cover our economic problems.

and those who choose not to work?

Show me where there is Any requirement to work in an at-will employment State.

Faithful execution of the laws is all I am asking.

CA Labor code at 2922: An employment, having no specified term, may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other. Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month.

Requiring for-cause criteria for UC without proving that employment relationship existed is unConstitutional.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

And employees are free to quit at any time. That is equality.

Equality is equal protection of the law for UC. That is equality.

Yes it is. And you are protected by the same law that protects the employers. You cannot be forced to work, and they cannot be forced to pay you if you quit.

 

[WinterBorn]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

Quite a reworking of that policy. UC's original mission is too limited and merely needs to be expanded to cover our economic problems.

and those who choose not to work?

Show me where there is Any requirement to work in an at-will employment State.

Faithful execution of the laws is all I am asking.

CA Labor code at 2922: An employment, having no specified term, may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other. Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month.

Requiring for-cause criteria for UC without proving that employment relationship existed is unConstitutional.

And none of that pertains to who is eligible for UC.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

And employees are free to quit at any time. That is equality.

Equality is equal protection of the law for UC. That is equality.

Yes it is. And you are protected by the same law that protects the employers. You cannot be forced to work, and they cannot be forced to pay you if you quit.

I am advocating removing that burden from employers. Unemployment is an externality to firms. It is a State responsibility.

 

[danielpalos]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

Quite a reworking of that policy. UC's original mission is too limited and merely needs to be expanded to cover our economic problems.

and those who choose not to work?

Show me where there is Any requirement to work in an at-will employment State.

Faithful execution of the laws is all I am asking.

CA Labor code at 2922: An employment, having no specified term, may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other. Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month.

Requiring for-cause criteria for UC without proving that employment relationship existed is unConstitutional.

And none of that pertains to who is eligible for UC.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of the law. Where does the labor code state you cannot quit on an at-will basis and not collect unemployment compensation? The labor could would have to say that for it to lawful for Labor faithfully executing at-will employment laws.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

And employees are free to quit at any time. That is equality.

Equality is equal protection of the law for UC. That is equality.

Yes it is. And you are protected by the same law that protects the employers. You cannot be forced to work, and they cannot be forced to pay you if you quit.

I am advocating removing that burden from employers. Unemployment is an externality to firms. It is a State responsibility.

And if the state is to be responsible, it will also be responsible for making sure all tax money spent goes only to those with a need.

 

[WinterBorn]

No. The mission of UC is to provide temporary income for people who have lost their job through no fault of their own.

Black codes were still in effect when UC was first created and implemented. That no longer applies in modern economic times since black codes were abolished.

Absolute bullshit. The black codes have nothing to do with the determination of who is eligible for unemployment in modern times.

Why because that policy was entirely, reworked?

The black codes were outlawed.

UC was not reworked from its original mission.

Quite a reworking of that policy. UC's original mission is too limited and merely needs to be expanded to cover our economic problems.

and those who choose not to work?

Show me where there is Any requirement to work in an at-will employment State.

Faithful execution of the laws is all I am asking.

CA Labor code at 2922: An employment, having no specified term, may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other. Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month.

Requiring for-cause criteria for UC without proving that employment relationship existed is unConstitutional.

And none of that pertains to who is eligible for UC.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of the law. Where does the labor code state you cannot quit on an at-will basis and not collect unemployment compensation? The labor could would have to say that for it to lawful for Labor faithfully executing at-will employment laws.

It does not need to say it. The right to quit is yours. That does not mean there are no consequences to your choice.

The UC says you cannot collect unemployment if you willingly quit a job.

 

[initforme]

An employer that fires somebody without reason should not be able to hire another without a stiff monetary penalty. At will is a rotten and bad policy.

 

[WinterBorn]

An employer that fires somebody without reason should not be able to hire another without a stiff monetary penalty. At will is a rotten and bad policy.

What about an employee who quits without reason? Should they receive compensation?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, you can quit a job at any time. And you can be fired at any time. In both cases you lose the benefits of the working relationship. You no longer get paid and the employer no longer gets the benefit of your labor. There is no inequality.

You miss the point. It is about State public policies. Show me any work requirement in any State Constitution or the labor code in any at-will employment State for UC.

No need. You have yet to show the law benefits the employers while not benefiting the employees.

It does benefit employers while putting a down pressure on wages for Labor as the least wealthy under our form of Capitalism.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

― Anatole France

How does it benefit employers?

Being able to hire and fire on an at-will basis benefits employers. Why no State policy that says employers can't fire anyone without suffering a tax loss if they don't have a good reason? That could include corporate downsizing since that happens on a for-profit basis.

And employees are free to quit at any time. That is equality.

Equality is equal protection of the law for UC. That is equality.

Yes it is. And you are protected by the same law that protects the employers. You cannot be forced to work, and they cannot be forced to pay you if you quit.

I am advocating removing that burden from employers. Unemployment is an externality to firms. It is a State responsibility.

And if the state is to be responsible, it will also be responsible for making sure all tax money spent goes only to those with a need.

We have a general welfare clause. Solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure promotes the general welfare not the general badfare, as the Right Wing would prefer.

 

[danielpalos]

It does not need to say it.

Yes, it does. Especially in any at-will employment State.

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."
--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atwill_employment#:~:text=In%20U.S.%20labor%20law%2C%20at,race%2C%20religion%20or%20sexuality).

 

[danielpalos]

The UC says you cannot collect unemployment if you willingly quit a job.

UC is provided by an Agency of a State. States have no authority to deny or disparage our civil liberties through unequal protection of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

An employer that fires somebody without reason should not be able to hire another without a stiff monetary penalty. At will is a rotten and bad policy.

Right wingers don't care as long as those with the most Gold make the most rules under Capitalism.