Reader Opinion: Federal government shouldn't pay for family leave
So Sen. Marco Rubio has hatched a plan to let people who need family leave from their jobs, take Social Security a little early for a while.
Maybe this is Marco's way to appease the other side that's never seen a government program they don't like and maybe it's Marco's way to bust Social Security a little faster. After all that's the goal of a lot of Republicans. Social Security doesn't need any help going broke it's doing that very well all by itself. It's a program that when initiated, cost you 2 percent of your take
home pay and right now it's more like 12 percent and losing ground fast. They—meaning
the Republicans—would like to take a page out of the president's playbook and call
the whole program bankrupt.
Part of the Trump doctrine is not to fix Social Security but let it drown in its own juices. His words not mine. This would result in the biggest theft of pension funds in history because they, our politicians, have spent all of the money collected on everything that came along and all we the people will get in the end, is some worthless I.O.U.'s from a government that is in its own right --
going broke fast.
I'm not against family leave; it has several important benefits and the family structure needs all of the help it can get and several employers have started programs for just that. At the corporate level is the right way to do it and having happy more productive employees will reward them for doing it. Maybe some legislation needs to be introduced to reward companies who do this, to help others sponsor it too but in no event should the federal government be paying for it.