[slg]

It all comes down to our "freedom" fetish. Why should the government force me to take 4 weeks of vacation when I can make due with 2? Why would I want to build my day around a train schedule when I could just get in my car and drive? And so on.

[xeromal]

You are kind of simplifying it to make it seem more stupid than it already is.

My dad would be annoyed that he has to pay for all this "extra" stuff in order to grow his business. Simple as that. He believes that the big companies already provide some semblance of benefits so really the only people hurt are the people with small businesses. You can go get another job if you don't like it.

[slg]

I wrote it somewhat tongue in check from the employee's perspective. No one would refuse being offered more vacation. However, like you said people don't want to be forced to offer and/or pay for that vacation. The belief is if people really want the vacation, the free market will force employers to give that vacation and therefore any government requirement is either not needed or overly onerous. It is a simplification, but when combined with Cold War fallout of Capitalism v. Socialism (which is often just a softer term for Communism in this country) it explains most of the things described in the original post.

[grecy]

You missed the point entirely.

Just because those things are available, you are not forced to use them.

You would have the best of both worlds, because you would have more choices, not less like you have now.

[slg]

You are asking me to defend a point that I disagree with, but as the argument goes, you pay for them regardless. Because these type of things are provided for the government, it means they are funded by tax dollars. I am therefore in a way participating in them because I have to pay for them.

If I don't want 4 weeks of vacation, why should I pay for everyone else to get 4 weeks of vacation?

[grecy]

> If I don't want 4 weeks of vacation, why should I pay for everyone else to get 4 weeks of vacation?

You want to pay for things like that because it makes your society stronger and healthier overall.

You already pay for everyone to use the police, jails, firemen, roads, sidewalks, parks, libraries, courts, etc. etc. even though you probably don't use them, or use them frequently. Why do you pay for other people to use police, courts and jails?

Have you ever wondered why the crime rate in the US is so high compared to developed countries? One of the reasons is because people are very desperate. They have low education, no healthcare, so safety net, so they have nothing to lose. If you had "paid" for them to have those things, those people would be happier, healthier, and you wouldn't be 10 times more likely to be murdered than I am.

After 10 years in the US I went back to Australia for a few weeks and it slapped me in the face - there are very few desperate people in Australia. Even the lowest paid people have healthcare, education, own their own home and have toys like project cars.

That's just one example, but you need to stop thinking about "me, me, me" and think "us, us, us"

[slg]

I don't disagree with you, I am just providing the general reasoning for these things.

[kbenson]

> That's just one example, but you need to stop thinking about "me, me, me" and think "us, us, us"

I like how that can work to further your point whether you read is as "us" or "U.S."

[unfamiliar]

To play devils advocate: allowing 4 weeks of paid vacation, no questions asked, will eventually be reflected in the salary as a result of economic forces. Then someone who can make do with 2 days vacation will not be able to get paid for those extra 4 weeks, even if they are willing to work them.

[microcolonel]

If this would prevent my employer from rewarding me for only taking two weeks of vacation, I would argue that it'd be unconstitutional.

[gjm11]

What part of the constitution would it be contrary to?