Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Bad or good is irrelevant, it's simply not legal.Tell me how anyone being able to quit on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States and collect unemployment compensation would be Bad and not Good.All I have is the law which is clear on the topic.Again, all you have is an opinion that didn't work in a couple countries. You have an idea that even your congressman believes is not valid and full of fallacy. Your opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at a Starbucks. All you do is talk and you can't seem to take action yourself or get anyone to take action for your idea. Your argument is to redefine words and phrases, those aren't arguments, only soothsayers try that.Not by anyone on this board. You need valid rebuttals not merely fallacy and insisting you are Right merely because you are on the right wing. Present valid arguments with no provable fallacies right wingers. You can't.Y'all need valid arguments. Every fallacy means you lost the argument because you have no valid arguments for rebuttal.
All your arguments have been shot down, even your assemblyman in liberal California didn’t like your arguments and dismissed it as fallacy.
Tell me how anyone being able to quit on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States would be Bad and not Good.
You don't have law, otherwise the court system would have corrected itself and your congressman would not need to pass a bill because it is already law. You have nothing but wishful thinking.
We always have been able to quit an at will job., it works well. It isn't bad, it is already good.
Tell me how anyone being able to quit on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States and collect unemployment compensation would be Bad and not Good.All I have is the law which is clear on the topic.Again, all you have is an opinion that didn't work in a couple countries. You have an idea that even your congressman believes is not valid and full of fallacy. Your opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at a Starbucks. All you do is talk and you can't seem to take action yourself or get anyone to take action for your idea. Your argument is to redefine words and phrases, those aren't arguments, only soothsayers try that.Not by anyone on this board. You need valid rebuttals not merely fallacy and insisting you are Right merely because you are on the right wing. Present valid arguments with no provable fallacies right wingers. You can't.Y'all need valid arguments. Every fallacy means you lost the argument because you have no valid arguments for rebuttal.
All your arguments have been shot down, even your assemblyman in liberal California didn’t like your arguments and dismissed it as fallacy.
Tell me how anyone being able to quit on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States would be Bad and not Good.
You don't have law, otherwise the court system would have corrected itself and your congressman would not need to pass a bill because it is already law. You have nothing but wishful thinking.
We always have been able to quit an at will job., it works well. It isn't bad, it is already good.
No one other than you says that.My arguments are more valid than Yours, why don't You accept my arguments which resort to fewer fallacies than those presented by the right wing?All you needed the whole time was valid arguments for rebuttal.You have been told over and over and over, reasoned with over and over and over, and you don’t want to accept whatever anyone else says, you don’t want a discussion, you want agreement with your idea, even the congressman knew it wouldn’t fly and he told you you’d have to pay him to present the bill. You have nothing, no bill, court case, nothing but fallacy.
I have valid arguments, just because you don’t accept them, doesn’t make them less valid. If you arguments are valid, take them to court or to a congressman and then have them pass the law. That your California assemblyman won’t sponsor it in the state of California, where nonsense thrives, it seems your arguments have failed.
All you have is stories, right winger. I have posted more arguments with fewer fallacies and y'all still ignore them. See how easy that is.Not by anyone on this board. You need valid rebuttals not merely fallacy and insisting you are Right merely because you are on the right wing. Present valid arguments with no provable fallacies right wingers. You can't.Y'all need valid arguments. Every fallacy means you lost the argument because you have no valid arguments for rebuttal.
All your arguments have been shot down, even your assemblyman in liberal California didn’t like your arguments and dismissed it as fallacy.
I have done that. You ignore any arguments that do not support your fantasy. I have posted links to support my arguments and you still ignore them.
Tell me how unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in an at-will basis would be Bad and not Good for our economy.
Actually, it IS a special program. Employers pay into it through special taxes. That's one reason why it works so well. To do what you want, you once again have to turn it into welfare with a general tax on the whole country, because it would not be right or sustainable to force employers to cover ever increasing numbers of people who refuse to work available jobs.It is not a special program. It is not means tested and merely flouts the equal protection of our State and federal Constitutions.There is only one law that governs employment relationships.The at-will employment laws and unemployment compensation are different completely separate things.
Absolutely wrong. You can quit anytime. You can be fired anytime.
But there is a special program for those who lose their job through no fault of their own. And that is as it should be.
Tell me how anyone being able to quit on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States and collect unemployment compensation would be Bad and not Good.All I have is the law which is clear on the topic.Again, all you have is an opinion that didn't work in a couple countries. You have an idea that even your congressman believes is not valid and full of fallacy. Your opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at a Starbucks. All you do is talk and you can't seem to take action yourself or get anyone to take action for your idea. Your argument is to redefine words and phrases, those aren't arguments, only soothsayers try that.Not by anyone on this board. You need valid rebuttals not merely fallacy and insisting you are Right merely because you are on the right wing. Present valid arguments with no provable fallacies right wingers. You can't.Y'all need valid arguments. Every fallacy means you lost the argument because you have no valid arguments for rebuttal.
All your arguments have been shot down, even your assemblyman in liberal California didn’t like your arguments and dismissed it as fallacy.
Tell me how anyone being able to quit on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States would be Bad and not Good.
You don't have law, otherwise the court system would have corrected itself and your congressman would not need to pass a bill because it is already law. You have nothing but wishful thinking.
We always have been able to quit an at will job., it works well. It isn't bad, it is already good.
It is not a special program. It is not means tested and merely flouts the equal protection of our State and federal Constitutions.There is only one law that governs employment relationships.The at-will employment laws and unemployment compensation are different completely separate things.
Absolutely wrong. You can quit anytime. You can be fired anytime.
But there is a special program for those who lose their job through no fault of their own. And that is as it should be.
Not two different things at all since they rely on the default employment relation but are applied unequally for Labor as the least wealthy in our republic. There is only one law that describes an employment relationship in our at-will employment States.This is the law regarding employment at-will. Show us where Cause is required:No, there is not. There is a barrier to unemployment compensation if you chose to quit your job or are fired for cause.
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.
YOu are trying to make at-will employment laws the same as the requirements for unemployment compensation. They are two different things.
All you have is stories, right winger. I have posted more arguments with fewer fallacies and y'all still ignore them. See how easy that is.Not by anyone on this board. You need valid rebuttals not merely fallacy and insisting you are Right merely because you are on the right wing. Present valid arguments with no provable fallacies right wingers. You can't.Y'all need valid arguments. Every fallacy means you lost the argument because you have no valid arguments for rebuttal.
All your arguments have been shot down, even your assemblyman in liberal California didn’t like your arguments and dismissed it as fallacy.
I have done that. You ignore any arguments that do not support your fantasy. I have posted links to support my arguments and you still ignore them.
Tell me how unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in an at-will basis would be Bad and not Good for our economy.
If there is no requirement to look for work, how is that an Agency of a State can deny or disparage unemployment benefits for simply being unemployed in our at-will employment States.I did not say there was a requirement to look for work.
Show us a law that requires you be paid, from the tax coffers, for doing nothing?
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
You miss the point. Employment is at the will of either party. What basis does a State have to infringe in the obligation of contracts regarding employment at-will in an at-will employment State? Why mention any for-cause stipulation at all?I will be glad to. There is no requirement because there doesn't have to be. They are independent of UC. I showed you this before, and I'll show it again:
You simply making up facts and insisting you are Right is merely right wing fantasy. You have shown nothing but appeals to ignorance of the law.There can be because qualifications do not infringe on the at will doctrine. I've shown you this repeatedly, it's not my problem that you either refuse to acknowledge it or are too dense to get it.
Simple faithful execution of the law is a qualification. On what basis does any State deny or disparage our privileges and immunities regarding employment at the will of either party for unemployment compensation?There is no requirement unless you want to qualify for benefits. You are always free to not work. What you are NOT free to, however, is the money others have earned.
It must be legal in an at-will employment State.Bad or good is irrelevant, it's simply not legal.
It is not a problem under Capitalism merely a market based metric for an employer to raise wages. Free market capitalism. Only right wingers have a problem with it.Now as for bad, it's been explained to you that would merely result in a bunch of people taking a job just long enough to qualify as being employed, then quitting to continue getting paid. The fact that you don't see anything amiss with that is the problem.
Why do you believe it would be promoting people to not work instead of a market based metric for employers to raise wages on an Institutional basis to retain qualified labor?[Depends on the purpose would it not? Promoting people to not work is not healthy for people. One the largest causes of depression in the US is not working, it damages self worth and self confidence, it can lead to isolation. Also, people not employed lack routine and struggle more from social and mental issues. Suicides are a lot higher if unemployed.
A disingenuous argument in any at-will employment State. Just quit if you don't have what it takes and go on unemployment. No one is requiring you to work on an at-will basis in any at-will employment State. I am sure somebody else with a greater work ethic would love to work and make more money that unemployment compensation.What right do you have to take what a person earns and give it to a person that has not worked?
Sounds more like an unnecessary burden on employers. Better administration of that program would not have employers pay for unemployment compensation directly. The revenue for that program should be through general taxes since anyone earning an income could be paying general taxes for it.Actually, it IS a special program. Employers pay into it through special taxes. That's one reason why it works so well. To do what you want, you once again have to turn it into welfare with a general tax on the whole country, because it would not be right or sustainable to force employers to cover ever increasing numbers of people who refuse to work available jobs.
Edit to add: The bottom line here is you are trying to force employers to pay for what the whole country should pay for, namely a massive new welfare program that would require trillions in new taxes. Unsustainable.
Funding is the least concern since we should be abolishing our wasteful spending on our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.Funding. There are enough worthy projects that need to be funded by our taxes. But providing an income for someone who simply chooses not to work, but does not need the money is not one of those projects.
Unlike our alleged endless war on poverty? Solving simple poverty in a market friendly manner promotes and provides for the general welfare. No special need only a simple, market friendly solution.Yes, it very much is a special project. And for a very specific need.
