"Illinois Democrat Governor protecting workers rights."

No, the Illinois democrat governor is offering another handout, albeit a small handout.

It plays well with the left, while having little likely impact on employers.

"How's it compare with the handouts you get from Uncle Sam?"

I haven't gotten any. Yet.

Maybe the Illinois governor can get me some.

"-worthless min wage morons who would never be a valuable enough employee to earn paid time off"

Yeah. This whole thing is a bit silly. After a year, a worker would have 52 hours of paid time off available.

If you're an employee worth your salt, is your employer going to fire you because you need to take a day off for a sick kid? Or because you want to go do something fun? Of course not.

That's why this is much ado about nothing.

"Rwingers prefer big handouts to Big Corporations."

If this was a handout funded by the taxpayers of Illinois...who gives a ----?

But it's not. It's a mechanism to force employers to do something that they may not otherwise do.

#33

From an economic perspective, why would "trickle down" work. Just because I am making more money does not mean I am going to pay more for the goods and services I purchase. The fact that I make more money does not explicitly affect the labor value of those whom I would employ.

That said, if I make more money, I am willing to pay more for those goods and services. If the supply doesn't change relative to the demand, then those who are providing goods and services gain an edge in pricing power, and they will have the ability to charge more. And we have seen this occur at both the regional and national levels.

"All of your economic Heroes said it would."

Like JFK?

"Trickle-down economics is a term used in critical references to economic policies to say they disproportionately favor the upper end of the economic spectrum, i.e. wealthy investors and large corporations."

Of course.

YOu can't really cut taxes for those who don't pay them in the first place.

"You know so little about the private sector."

I don't?

I'm an investor. So I'm kinda interested.

As for trickle-down working, consider this. The president of American Airlines recently released a memo to it's pilots indicating that their salaries were going to go up. A lot. For a narrow-body captain at the top of the scale, salary increases would be $135k per year ($470k total per year). Salaries for wide-body captains would increase by $170k per year to $590K. This was largely in response to Delta's recent agreement with it's pilots to also increase salaries.

I wouldn't call it trickle-down personally, but there is some mechanism that has driven these firms to drastically increase salaries for their pilots. Additionally, this letter coresponds with a three-point drop in the price of the stock.

#44

"Supply side economics invokes the most basic element of human nature: self-interest. We all seek to improve our material circumstances. The tinier the tax man's bite, the greater is our incentive to produce. As tax burdens lighten, motivation heightens, sparking a robust economy. Allowing producers to enjoy their hard earned gains is both just and effective.

Contrasted with demand side economics it's a no-brainer. It is neither just nor effective to funnel public money to political favorites hoping they will spend lavishly and thus stimulate production. Paying people not to produce inspires little effort. Depriving producers of needed capital so it can instead be transferred according to political whim ridicules the very pretense of stimulus.

Even calling political waste "investments" merely makes the semantics more palatable to gullible voters. Rather than paying people to consume others' wealth hoping this will rejuvenate production, it obviously works far better to let producers enjoy their gains. We will always direct our own resources better than will politicians or their bureaucratic henchman. It's not rocket science. Tax cuts incent production; profligate spending enables sloth and encourages corruption."

Did you even read the article before you posted it?

"I'm curious how much time the objectors to this law think employers should be legally permitted to extract from their employees regardless of circumstance."

Exctract?

This is a UNION negotiating with American Airlines during a small pilot SHORTAGE and American Airlines trying not to lose pilots to Delta and other carriers. The "mechanism that has driven" this is fierce competition for pilots and a strong union."

A strong union has nothing to do with it. It is the need for pilots that drives up their pricing power. No matter how strong the union, they would not have been able to negotiate this deal in August of 2020. Or probably August of 2021 for that matter.

Furthermore, this is a perfect use case for why income isn't distribute equally. It's becuase skills are not distributed equally, which means that the ability to earn an income isn't distributed equally. In this case, both narrow and wide-body captains are sitting solidly in the much derided top 1% of income earners, and seeing incomes rise by 40%. And let's not forget that many airline pilots are retired military, getting an additional $60k per year or so in military retirement pay.

FA's have demanded a 35% increase, but they are unlikely to get it. There is an endless list of applicants for those positions, and it only takes a few weeks to produce a new FA. It takes years to train a pilot. And baggage handlers are likely in even less of a position to demand higher wages, as they can be replaced by nearly anyone.

OUr friends in the Piketty camp would tell you this is just another example of the top 1% skimming what should rightly go to lower income earners, but the economic realities paint a different picture.

"The article doesn't say specifically, how many workers this will impact."

It states the type of workers. Part-time workers, students, and government employees are exempt from this rule.

Which really means that employers could minimize the effects of the new legislation, if they cared, by limiting the number of full-time employees they hired.