The Gig Economy Keeps Growing, But Worker Benefits Aren't (technologyreview.com) 154
An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: According to a new report out from Brookings, the number of non-employer firms -- primarily incorporated freelancers and gig-economy workers -- has grown 2.6 percent every year since 1997. By contrast, payroll employment has grown by only 0.8 percent annually in that time. That means a growing number of people lack employer-sponsored benefits like paid leave, health care, and retirement assistance. The Aspen Institute has proposed a system of portable benefits that are not tied to one job. Companies would make contributions to a worker's benefits on the basis of how much the employee works for them. To date, the U.S. government has not been helpful. House and Senate bills supporting gig-worker benefits have died in committee. But state and local governments are taking action. Washington, California, New York, and New Jersey are exploring avenues to provide benefits to their gig workers.
What, is it illegal? (Score:1)
To date, the U.S. government has not been helpful. House and Senate bills mandating gig-worker benefits have died in committee.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Gig-work is meant to undermine worker benefits by turning everybody into a private contractor who gets no benefits.
If it is lowering costs to business owners as well, then it is working entirely as designed.
Anybody who expected a different outcome is just a sucker
Re: (Score:3)
Gig-work is meant to undermine worker benefits by turning everybody into a private contractor who gets no benefits.
Nonsense!
Lack of *employer-sponsored benefits* does not mean a lack of benefits. One can buy health insurance, invest in health savings plans, and whatever other investment strategies you'd prefer like money markets, stocks, bonds, etc. As much or as little, any combination or none at all, whatever the individual chooses.
It's all about asking oneself how much individual liberty are you prepared to be responsible for? How much of your life do you want government and corporations involved in?
Having everyone a
Re: (Score:1)
For many workers this is exactly what it means. They do not make enough money to buy health insurance or save for retirement. Individual choice is limited by how much money you have.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, that is true, but maybe that is a problem of money rather than benefits. I always thought that freelancing should pay better than a salaried job, because of the extra risk you take on. But in the gig economy, hourly rates seem to be extremely low. That is the key of the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
It can and often does....you just need to have skills valuable enough to commend the bill rate that can sustain you as a full time "gig".
If you aren't making that kind of $$ doing 1099, then you face facts that this is either just extra income to embellish the regular W2 job you really need, or you just find it isn't worth your time.
We should all be adults here, and these are very simple and plain choices to make here.
No one is hol
Re:What, is it illegal? (Score:4, Insightful)
Err...because in the real ADULT world of work, especially if you incorporate and do 1099 contract work, you'd better put on your big boy pants, and realize to do it full time, you need to learn to find jobs that have a high enough bill rate that you can negotiate for your needs.
This isn't rocket surgery, you need to figure what you need for expenses, (your salary you pay to yourself), and also out of that bill rate you figure in enough for you to take off maybe 3 weeks a year for vacation/sick leave...you set up a HSA (Health Savings Account) and fully fund it pre-tax with money you put into your bill rate to pay routine medical expenses, and finally..yes, you calculate enough into your bill rate to pay for medical insurance.
If you are not working in an area that you can bill that much, then you have a couple of choices...work multiple gigs at once that can pay this amount totaled together, or realize this is just side money, and you need a W2 regular job until you are valuable enough with your skills to negotiate jobs that pay enough to do 1099 full time.
This isn't for everyone.
But if you are an adult, can act like an adult....and take care of yourself, your work, paperwork, taxes, etc....it can be a fulfilling work lifestyle, it can be lucrative and there is a good amount of freedom to enjoy from it.
I personally like the S-corp filing for my business....extra paperwork etc....BUT, it allows me to save substantially on how much of my bill rate I have to pay in employment taxes (SS/medicare)....
But again, this isn't for everyone....you have to know what you cost to live, and bill accordingly and hunt only jobs that pay that much...otherwise, this is not a full time "gig" for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, yes I do....indeed one has to put on their "big boy pants", and take responsibility for the planning, paperwork, promotion....paying monthly and quarterly taxes (payroll, etc)...and insurance, AND invest your retirement money.
It isn't for everyone, but
Re: (Score:2)
How much of your life do you want government and corporations involved in?
As I see it, my corporation is involved way too much in decisions about my healthcare. I either have to let them choose what is covered or lose the entire benefit.
Such a law would help everyone shop around, even those in a full-time position.
Re: What, is it illegal? (Score:2)
I'm guessing you aren't delivering food on a bike 12 hours a day.
Re: (Score:2)
Gig-work is meant to undermine worker benefits by turning everybody into a private contractor who gets no benefits.
Nonsense!
Lack of *employer-sponsored benefits* does not mean a lack of benefits. One can buy health insurance, invest in health savings plans, and whatever other investment strategies you'd prefer like money markets, stocks, bonds, etc. As much or as little, any combination or none at all, whatever the individual chooses.
Sure, just like there is no different between the cost of aspirin from the drug store where it is a buyer's market and the emergency room where it is a seller's market.
Re: (Score:1)
You cant buy those benefits when the pay is the same or lower than the compared job with benefits included.
It depends on the job and the market. Not all are the same. Those who do their research can do extremely well.
You need to think out of the box as well. If you build a good reputation as a residential electrician or plumber you van make Silicon Valley wages and retire quite comfortably. Even a house painter or roofer with a good reputation can do very well if he picks his market area wisely.
The same goes if you've got a solid reputation as a residential remodeling contractor. Many of the occupations I listed
The socialism drum beats on. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: The socialism drum beats on. (Score:1)
Yeah, if you are a CEO driving a corporation into bankruptcy with your incompetence then you clearly deserve nothing. Heck, if you want benefits, sell yourself into slavery. Then you become valuable property and will be taken care of by your owner.
Re:The socialism drum beats on. (Score:5, Informative)
hoist yourself up by your own petards
You know this phrase means killing yourself, right? Seems less than helpful advice.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: The socialism drum beats on. (Score:1)
That's 546 miles per day or 23 miles every hour or nearly 70 miles every hour of an 8 hour work day.
Either the driver was full of shit or you are.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's better than the Republican health plan - "Please die quickly!"
Life is long and hard. It's even longer without a sense of humor. But hard to feel sorry for ya if you don't have one.
Re:The socialism drum beats on. (Score:5, Funny)
hoist yourself up by your own petards
You know this phrase means killing yourself, right? Seems less than helpful advice.
Well it would reduce the labor market, driving up demand, pay, and benefits so..... it kinda works.
Re: (Score:2)
Improve your skills, become marketable, hoist yourself up by your own petards, and join the economy as a maker and not a taker.
What the hell does this drivel actually mean? Improve ones skill and then be blown up by a bomb you created?
Re: (Score:2)
Improve your skills, become marketable, hoist yourself up by your own petards, and join the economy as a maker and not a taker.
What the hell does this drivel actually mean? Improve ones skill and then be blown up by a bomb you created?
Sounds like a replacement for Obamacare.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought that was one of the selling points of Obama care. Didn't Pelosi make some bs comments about how now that people had guaranteed healthcare they didn't need to worry about full time jobs and could pursue art and other crap?
Life is long and hard. It's even harder when your humor gland is missing.
Re: The socialism drum beats on. (Score:5, Insightful)
Too bad everything is locked down "forever minus one day" otherwise others might try to create instead of take.
The whole point of the "gig" economy is to strip workers of their protections by classifying them as "self-employed" contractors who have much less benefits and legally required protections, (no workman's comp, health insurance, or overtime pay) while still effectivelly treating them as employees. (Dictating their work hours, pay, job requirements, and firing options.) We've seen this coming for awhile now with the whole lack of employer trust, and constant desire to marginalize the workforce and render everyone replaceable. (C-Levels exempt of course.) It's just the latest move by greedy shareholders desperately trying to squeeze indefinite growth out of a finite resource pool.
Of course that's capitalism for you, the losses are always socialised. Society is always expected to pick up the tab for corporate screw ups. Whether that screw up is wage theft, or too big to fail is irrelevant. They "couldn't possibly have known about such risks." But when profits are to be had, suddenly they "are solely responsible for this great achievement." Even if the achievement was produced solely with public funds.
I'm personally waiting for the company store to make a come back under the guise of "helping our workers keep more of their hard earned money."
Re: The socialism drum beats on. (Score:5, Insightful)
The gig economy has always been around, what's different this time is exactly what you're talking about. When it was people like my mother working part time for packet change or to supplement my father's income while still raising children, it wasn't much of an issue.
The difference is that people are increasingly forced into those sorts of arrangements to make ends meet as employers have more and more power to negotiate salary. So, folks turn to the gig economy as an essential part of their income rather than as pocket money.
The worst thing about it is that corporate profits are the highest they've ever been. There's literally no justification for not paying workers a living wage. And our economy would probably be doing even better as people at the bottom would have money with which to pay for goods and services.
Re: (Score:2)
The worst thing about it is that corporate profits are the highest they've ever been. There's literally no justification for not paying workers a living wage.
Isn't high profits a justification?
Except that's not capitalism ... (Score:2)
... it's corporate socialism. It is however sold to us as capitalism by the Ayn Rand fans. She'd be appaled.
Doesn't Scale [Re:The socialism drum beats on.] (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with using "just get better" as a justification for accepting growing inequality is that it does not scale. If everyone had PhD's, there wouldn't be enough room for the elite positions, and many PhD's would end up mopping floors and other grunt work.
It's not a zero-sum game, but close enough that "just get better" isn't a complete solution.
American workers rank among the top in the world in economic productivity, but the benefits of that hard work is not trickling down to most workers. I'm not proposing pure socialism, just enough of it to distribute the wealth better without significantly harming incentives. There's a better balance point than what we have now. Set the dial to 5 instead of 9 on the socialism-to-plutocracy scale.
Re:Doesn't Scale [Re:The socialism drum beats on.] (Score:5, Insightful)
>The problem with using "just get better" as a justification for accepting growing inequality is that it does not scale. If everyone had PhD's, there wouldn't be enough room for the elite positions, and many PhD's would end up mopping floors and other grunt work.
Sad thing is, the world is already getting to this point. I recently got my PhD, and in recent years I have seen (in multiple disciplines) many more people with PhDs than there are jobs (both industry and academic ones).
What happens is that the 'gig economy' is edging its way into the academic and industrial world too, with many more "visiting" or "contract" positions than there ever was before.
Re: (Score:1)
If you get a Masters or higher, prepare for a "practical" alternative that is hopefully related. For example, if you get a PhD in electrical engineering, consider and prepare for being a regular blue-collar electrician as a back-up job/career.
Re: The socialism drum beats on. (Score:1, Interesting)
National insurance works pretty well. Just ask those damn socialist countries like the UK, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, etc.. They keep productivity up by keeping their workers well cared for and out of bankruptcy and poverty traps, which are far more expensive to corporations and governments.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if the US were to stop using OUR military funded from OUR taxes here to run protection for Europe and many other places around the world...and those countries then had to spend their own tax dollars for their own defense, I think we'd see them having to maybe pull back on all the "free" socialist health offerings.
Frankly, I'm all for it.....let them see how it does without thi
Re:The socialism drum beats on. (Score:5, Insightful)
We still need people to drive people around from point A to point B, answer customer complaint calls, and that. It doesn't matter how much people improve their skills and all that, somebody has to do those jobs; we still need them, and there aren't enough engineering, executive, what have you jobs to go around for everyone and there never will be.
Are you willing to say that it's OK that some people, no matter how hard they work, have to live on the margins? Because I don't think that that's a very healthy society.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, "that's life"....and it always has been.
Not everyone is born equal, not with equal physical or mental faculties, and yes, some are luckier than others.
But that is nature and that is human life and has been since the dawn of time.
Nothing is going to change that...the best you can do is offer conditions so that people can use their gifts they do have, and figure out and struggle to better
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't have to be that way -- we can decide as a society that everyone's basic rights do include affordable access to healthcare, for instance. Yes, that means people will have to pay taxes and such. But that doesn't make it impossible to accomplish.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I don't buy into it.
I really am not my brothers keeper, and the US was not set up to, by force of law, redistribute wealth in order to make me be my brothers keeper.
It was set up to let the individualist succeed.
I"m not completely cold hearted, I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a bit more optimistic, I don't necessarily think it is on its way down the toilet, but I do see decline.
I think the decline IS due to the more "progressive" teachings that have now taken ahold of the last couple generations.
Kids are no longer being raised to respect elders or each other, they don't value education. We've systematically been deterring boys from becoming men, and feminizing them. We've been more and more, pushing people into the g
Re: (Score:2)
So again, the problem is what about people who are working full time, but on low-paying jobs (which is where this got started)? We still need those sales clerks, call center staffers, janitors, what have you. And there isn't enough demand for engineers, managers, skilled tradespeople, higher level sales people, and all that to ensure that there are positions available for everyone. You say you expect everyone who's able-bodied to work, but aren't then prepared to ensure that everyone who's working can li
Re: (Score:2)
We still need people to drive people around from point A to point B
Automated taxis are close.
answer customer complaint calls
Not since the last few times I have called customer service. If you have a long enough phone tree, then all customer service calls are resolved before requiring a human.
Are you willing to say that it's OK that some people, no matter how hard they work, have to live on the margins? Because I don't think that that's a very healthy society.
We already do that and it is not.
Shocking! (Score:5, Insightful)
The "gig-economy" isn't a new concept. This is how things used to be before there were unions. What happened was laborers were exploited and then unionized to fight back for fair treatment. The outcome here will be no different, even if different means are used.
Re: Shocking! (Score:1, Interesting)
Is that the dewy eyed crap they teach in school now? I think you should read a real history of labor unions instead of the pablum you just spewed.
Re: (Score:2)
The "gig-economy" isn't a new concept. This is how things used to be before there were unions.
Not at all. You're just comparing the benefits. The actual work process is incredibly different. If it needed to be compared to anything it would be to labour-for-hire companies.
Misleading statistic (aka fake news) (Score:2)
the number of non-employer firms -- primarily incorporated freelancers and gig-economy workers -- has grown 2.6 percent every year since 1997. By contrast, payroll employment has grown by only 0.8 percent annually in that time.
Do you see the deception in that quote? Number of "firms" compared to "payroll employment". What that tells me is that many small firms are being started (which is a good thing), but most start-ups have few workers (employee or not). Meanwhile, overall employment across the economy is growing at at healthy rate.
And gig economy has nothing to do with unions or guilds; everything from electricians and plumbers to doctors and lawyers are part of the gig economy. If you have a marketable skill you'll do well.
insurance (Score:3, Informative)
12000 PER year in insurance.
Yeah. In 1999 12k per year would have bought me a full coverage plan with 0 co pay for my whole family and then some etc etc etc.
This year that buys me basically catastrophic coverage for 2 people.
We dumped HUGE sums of cash into the system and all of the pencil pushers raised the prices accordingly.
Re: (Score:2)
That price is before the insurance companies add on the penalties, too.
Sign up for our mandatory blood tests and "lifestyle counseling" in the form of long, probing questionnaires, or we'll charge you a $500 wellness tax... I mean, you won't qualify for our wellness credit!
Re: (Score:2)
According to the Economist there is significant rent seeking [pnhp.org] in the US healthcare industry.
And a mind boggling set of layers that push funds and rebates back and forth between them, skimming profit as they go.
Let's hope someone like Amazon can come in and clean this us into a straightforward, more transparent and more efficient architecture
My take away from reading the article was that it seems incredible to me that someone had not stepped in before
What's the difference (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
The first one that comes to mind is setting your own rate. In the gig economy, the one handing out the gigs has set what you get. As a freelancer you negotiate on the price and strike a deal if you can come to an agreement.
The gig economy is just what we had before the unions and labor laws. Factory bosses, harbor masters etc would round up people interested in doing some work each morning and letting those they thought could do the job in. The next day the process repeated. No job security, no guarantees,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine a company that only found you rides for a %. Then a competitor comes along and offers you rides for $X where neither the driver nor the passenger has to negotiate anything. I think most people would go with the competing service.
Re: (Score:2)
Difference is when you do gig you do so because you are screwed. When you start a business you have lots of capital, customers, and other things that prepare you.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not an employee making wealth for someone else if you run your own business.
The point is to make an end run (Score:3, Insightful)
The only potential good that might come out of all this is America might wise up and vote single payer healthcare in. But right now the party in charge is completely opposed to it and I don't see them getting kicked out anytime soon. We're still arguing over assault rifles and abortion for Pete's sake (hurray for wedge issues!).
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same laws (Score:4, Interesting)
tl;dr. No man is an island.
Re: (Score:2)
"Bad lifestyle choices".
Re: (Score:2)
"Where are the laws to protect private business owners."
They are also designed to protect you in that you need to have customers with disposable income, or the firms that contract with you need to have them in order to invest.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe not minimum wage, but there are a lot of laws and an competent legal system to help small businesses arbitrate disputes, secure payment etc.
I believe there should be more help for entrepreneurs in the shape of efficient socialized healthcare, so people can be entrepreneurial without putting their family's health on the line.
Maybe there should be fewer laws supporting regulatory capture
Re:The point is to make an end run (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
As they should. It's how mixed economies work. The privileged reimburse the non-privileged so that a decent society can be maintained.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You don't think that's a good deal? Your life isn't worth the little bit of taxes you pay?
I'd say you're getting off cheap.
See, here's the thing: There are a hell of a lot more people who are poor than those who are rich. In fact, our very economic system depends on there being a lot more poor people than rich people. It's by design. If there were no poor people, then how would rich people know they wer
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY. Money accumulated != money earned.
That's why right wingers should stop bitching about taxes and social spending. You have your boot heel on the necks of the proles for too long, they'll decide to come for yours.
Single payer means the government pays (Score:1)
One more think I forgot to add (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure: elitist bullshit. Pretending that the poor don't pay sales, property and most importantly payroll taxes (which are automatically deducted for health care) is engaging in sophistry.
Re:The point is to make an end run (Score:4, Interesting)
around minimum wage and overtime laws. There's no other purpose. If you're a worker then you should be deeply opposed to this. Unless you're in a strong union they _will_ eventually come for you too. And the only strong union left I know of is the AMA. Lord knows us tech workers don't have anything of the sort.
The only potential good that might come out of all this is America might wise up and vote single payer healthcare in. But right now the party in charge is completely opposed to it and I don't see them getting kicked out anytime soon. We're still arguing over assault rifles and abortion for Pete's sake (hurray for wedge issues!).
It is more than this. Businesses LOVE temp work!
They can fire them. Replace them. Use them as needed and throw them out to make room for coffee in the budget ( my brother's words who is a senior director in a fortune 100 company which I will not mention here).
I know. I was just laid off yesterday. I am 41 and screwed in the contract trap. I was doing ok until I lost my job in February 2017. I took a contact job which I was promised was long term but asked around found out only 2/3rs are still employed after metrics within 6 months. I had bills to pay. So I took it. I was let go when my metrics didn't match.
5 months later employers decided I was "unhirable". I took a temp job which I was promised was only 6 weeks. I took it as my savings were near empty. Now that is done and I had another only contract job but I was told I would always be hired and htis was a contract until December. I took it. ... 2nd day I was reprimanded when for giving advice to my boss when he asked for suggestions. I was told I was a contactor and a nobody to him! Do what I what I say and keep your mouth shut until you are hired. I immediately called the company I wanted to work for to see if the job was sitll open as I didn't trust my new employer. I do not want to hear about you etc. 4 weeks later the Gartner Group came in and mentioned a company called TATA India and how we waste money on I.T. when competitiors outsource to cut costs etc.
Funny I was let go again due to organization structural changes. The permanent employees had to be protected but the share price was down and the CIO wanted to justify his job.
The other employer I wanted is now hesitant as the client is wondering why I fucking can't hold onto a job!!
This is BS! I never had such job hopping or bad experiences until I started contracting. Once you are in and your resume lists so many employers over years you are stuck as HR assumes you are incompetent. Once contracting things end all the damn time for any reason which reconfirms you are unhirable and this is not the true me by a long shot.
I am telling you from experience it is because companies want to fire all their employees after each project ends. It has nothing to do with healthcare and I have been lied to so many times and another commenter mentioning being let go 1 day before benefits kick in is just the kicker.
I saved projects twice and got let go for being too good at what I do as I am no longer needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're listing these wrong on your resume. Start your own business and work corp to corp, then you can list on your resume one continuous employer.
Law of Supply and Demand (Score:5, Interesting)
Legal chain immigration brings about 1M legal immigrants into the country per year. That's on top of the illegals, most of whom compete with workers on the low end.
It doesn't matter what you feel about immigration. The fact is that our immigration policies are nothing more than a safety valve on capital to ensure that the supply side is always high enough that the demand side never has to negotiate.
Here's a simple plan that would cause real growth in average wages very quickly:
1. Build the wall with the military's budget like Trump is threatening.
2. Abolish chain immigration.
3. Shred the green cards of all immigrants who arrived on chain migration in the last 20 years and order them to self-deport or face prison time.
4. Tie corporate taxes to how much business and how many American citizens are employed by the business.
5. Impose steep FICA excise taxes on outsourced labor. Make that offshore team in India so damn expensive in FICA costs that its not competitive.
6. Shred NAFTA and impose a minimum 25% tariff on all goods made by American companies in Mexico for the American market.
7. Pass a federal law that allows state and federal law enforcement to declare any business that relies on illegals to be a criminal enterprise as a whole entity and make its entire asset sheet liable for liquidation upon conviction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Equally low pay for contract workers (Score:2)
If you force the companies to treat contractors like employees, they'll pay them the same.
The lack of restrictions hiring and firing and benefits is one of the reasons contractors get paid more than employees.
Benefits is lost money (Score:2)
If you're married then most of the time you only need one spouse to have the benefits. I get all of mine from my wife and the only thing I'm missing out on is life insurance and vision.
Having a job with no benefits is a better financial decision compared to working as a W2 and not using any of the benefits
Re: (Score:2)
"demographics is destiny" (Score:5, Insightful)
No amount of hand-wringing or puzzling over the edges of the gig economy, or living wages, the decline of manufacturing, or working conditions, are going to overcome the fundamental pressure of demographics.
There are too many workers for companies to feel any pressure to raise wages, provide better benefits, or do anything that they don't need to, to keep sufficient workers on staff. (in general).
Welcome to what it feels like when growth stalls -- everyone yells at everyone else thinking that someone caused / can fix the problem, when in fact it's mostly out of our hands. Don't worry, it'll work itself out -- in about 10-15 years... just wait a while.
Re:"demographics is destiny" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"demographics is destiny" (Score:4, Informative)
Neoliberal excuses (Score:2)
There is more than enough work to give every person a job, automation or no automation. Fixing America's existing, crumbling infrastructure alone would create millions of jobs. Rolling out a high-speed rail network would create millions more. As would putting up windmills and solar panels all over the place, backed up by pumped storage [wikipedia.org] if need be.
Far worse in other countries (Score:2)
Look at Japan or any number of European countries and see how many young people are working as contractors. They don't accrue retirement benefits like the previous generation and are screwed in the long run unless they are hired on at a company.
When the price of taking people on as full time employees is too high then businesses will do everything possible to avoid. This means contractors and outsourcing wherever feasible.
Duh! (Score:5, Insightful)
The Gig Economy Keeps Growing, But Worker Benefits Aren't
Umm... wasn't that kind of the whole point of companies pushing for a gig economy? Does anybody really believe that this consequence wasn't at least foreseen, if not downright planned for, by the corporate sector? Corporations believe it to be in their best interests both to reduce the amount of money they pay their employees, and to decrease those employees' freedom and autonomy so as to make them more docile and compliant. A gig economy gives workers the illusion of increased freedom, even as it increases their servitude. I'm pretty sure that's the penultimate wet-dream of c-levels and board members everywhere. Of course, the ultimate wet-dream is to replace all those workers with machines.
The age of cyberpunk... (Score:2)
... I call it.
It will pass sooner than we expect.
Another great idea (Score:1)
I'm Shocked! (Score:2)
Shocked I tell you. Disgusted and shocked at this new concept that the USA government doesn't provide workers in the country with legal protection. This is completely news to...
okay I couldn't finish that sentence without laughing at the idea that people in the USA have workers rights. Quite frankly we normally use the USA as a punchline when discussing worker's rights. So congress's response is at least expected and consistent.
Re: (Score:2)
Typical Illiberal hand-wringing (Score:2)
Actually, no, it does not mean that at all. I've had my own corporation for over 10 years, and always carried health insurance as well as contributed to by own Keogh Plan.
Doing business as your own corporation is enormously liberating, in fact — in a very real sense. You can change a clients, but you don't have to change your retirement plan arrangements, nor your insurer, for
Re: (Score:2)
oh shutup with this bullshit.