Why paying extra bureaucrats to cash-in just another tax from companies, which "tax" will come back to the fired employee in something like 10-20% of the value the government will cash-in? Because we all know how good bureaucrats are to handle tax money...
Why not just work on a law to protect employee from being fired when a machine comes in? Giving incentives and tax reductions for companies to help the invest more in that employee, to help him/her achieve a better education and to be able to work in the same company, but on a higher level or for a brand new niche that the company can open to?
Wouldn't be better for everybody to "prevent" and help companies keep their employees instead of "reacting" to companies firing employees?
Wouldn't be better to invest in education and progress instead of taxing progress and keeping the same level of education (or even lowering it on some cases)?
Isn't this just another case where bureaucrats are just trying to get their share from something they invent?
Slashdot Mirror
Why paying extra bureaucrats to cash-in just another tax from companies, which "tax" will come back to the fired employee in something like 10-20% of the value the government will cash-in? Because we all know how good bureaucrats are to handle tax money... Why not just work on a law to protect employee from being fired when a machine comes in? Giving incentives and tax reductions for companies to help the invest more in that employee, to help him/her achieve a better education and to be able to work in the same company, but on a higher level or for a brand new niche that the company can open to? Wouldn't be better for everybody to "prevent" and help companies keep their employees instead of "reacting" to companies firing employees? Wouldn't be better to invest in education and progress instead of taxing progress and keeping the same level of education (or even lowering it on some cases)? Isn't this just another case where bureaucrats are just trying to get their share from something they invent?