Why Republicans Are Opposed to Supporting the Poor - An Open Secret

[MineralMan]

23. I'm not certain, but I imagine that would have been one of the

goals of the Republicans, so it would not surprise me at all. Employers will offer it, if they are required to by law, but many will simply remove that as a benefit if they can still maintain full staffing.

It is a cost center for companies. That's all that matters to them. Even as I write, financial types are creating reports to show how much will be saved by dropping contributions to health insurance for employees. Companies have been scaling back their contributions to health insurance plans for some time, as far as they are able to do so.

If there is no requirement in the Republican bill, that will be a huge cause for celebration by many companies, especially those who hire primarily low-skilled workers. I'm thinking about manufacturing and food production companies in particular.

The bottom line is that people have to work to live. So, employers want to expend the least possible amount that will keep their business staffed with workers.

It's an ugly cycle, which is why some benefits are mandated, like unemployment insurance and worker's compensation insurance. If those were not mandated, they'd end as soon as the employers could change their payroll systems. Same with Social Security contributions from employers. Watch for eliminating that mandate to be part of some bill soon.

Self-employed people, like me, have long known the actual cost of paying for Social Security, medical insurance, and other things that employees take for granted. They are huge costs for the self-employed.