My point is the benefit would just be a cost of doing business. In addition to salary, all companies have to account for benefits and overhead per employee. This would just be one additional benefit cost.
Sure a big company has advantages they can leverage against small companies. That isn't a reason not to pass laws that affect companies for the good of everyone.
Starbucks can do all this stuff to crush competition today, and they do. The notion that somehow paid family leave would change these competitive conditions as drastically as you say is laughable.
As I said above, while the benefit should/would flow to all, but the cost does not have to be borne by all. 2-people businesses can be except from the cost. MA draws the line at 25-employee businesses I think, I don't necessarily thing that is the best way to draw the line. (For example, I would think payroll vs owner equity ratio should play a factor too. A 4-person mom and pop bakery is similarly situated as a 4-person private equity firm).
Further, even if done in-house, the cost does not have to be paid all at once. An employer would put money aside for this just like they have to put money aside for income taxes (a huge income tax bill due all at once can be catastrophic to a small business, which is why they pay bit by bit throughout the year).
Here is a decent FAQ:
https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/...for-businesses-on-the-massachusetts-paid.html
Here is the actual state site:
https://www.mass.gov/paid-family-and-medical-leave-information-for-massachusetts-employers
As I understand it, the law was based on how many other countries do it successfully. A company has the choice of having an in-house fund/program to make paid family leave happen, or they can make use of the state program paid for through a payroll cost. Very small companies are exempt from the cost but employees still get the benefit.
Fwiw, the Boston area is growing quite rapidly too. So is the research triangle in North Carolina, and the DC area, and others. I don't think you can attribute this shift in workforce and companies to "freedom." Some states and cities attract companies and employees with tax breaks, some do it with other amenities. There is no single driving factor.
All medical evidence shows that daycare does not convey the same short-term and long-term benefits as time with parents. While I fully support what you proposed, it is not an alternative to family leave.
I'm glad that you at least agree that government has a role to play in this.
[automerge]1573146234[/automerge]
That's really sad dude, nothing to be proud of.