Skip to main content

Paid Family Leave Failure with Mika Brzezinski and Raúl Labrador

Brzezinski asks Labrador about paid family leave 6 times in the clip below.  After the first question, Labrador answers clearly that it's not for the government to insist that private businesses give paid leave.  After the second attempt, he says that he had a private business and he gave his employees paid leave, but that (again) he doesn't believe it should be mandated by government.  Brzezinski keeps pressing on this and getting variations of the same answers until Labrador reminds her that he wasn't invited on the show to talk about paid family leave.

Brzezinski is not willing to accept his answer -- that private business should be free to handle leave in the way they see fit, since they must find a way to pay for the leave themselves -- and is not willing to argue for her own position.  Her own position seems to be that government should mandate that private businesses offer paid family leave, but she does not make a case as to why she holds this position, or how the leave would be paid for and enforced.

The audience is let down by this exchange.  Brzezinski should have made her own case clearly, and not simply repeated a question to which she had received a fair and apparently earnest answer.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Healthcare, Tom Price, Insurance, Cost, Ecomomics

Tom Price here claims the new American Health Care Act will "bring down costs" and "will allow for more individuals to be covered".  The Congressional Budget Office projects that the number of uninsured under the AHCA will increase from 31 million this year to 52 million by 2026.

If the number of insured people decreases, costs for insurance should increase -- that is, at least, according to the traditional economic axiom of supply and demand.  If there will be greater demand for healthcare as people age and the population grows, and less available supply of coverage through insurance, one would expect prices to increase.

How can the bill "bring costs down" if the number of uninsured goes up?


Raul Labrador, Health care coverage, Death

Congressman Raul Labrador said "Nobody dies because they don't have access to health care."

This statement is false given that if you have cancer it can kill you unless you get care.  Consider some other scenarios in which access to health care could prevent death:


Snake biteCrocodile biteEbola virusWolf attackGunshot woundBroken neckDehydrationShark attack

Without access to health care, people suffering from any of the above may die.  Clearly, then, people do die when they don't have access to health care.

Karl Oliver, Confederate Monuments, New Orleans, Lynching, Mississippi

Mississippi State Representative Karl Oliver said that if the leadership of "Louisiana wishes to... burn books or destroy historical monuments... they should be lynched."



Oliver has a problem here, in that lynching is the illegal or extralegal torture, murder, and mutilation by a mob.

If he is serious in his assertion that people who destroy monuments should be lynched, then he is actually calling for their extralegal torture, murder, and mutilation.  Because he posted this on social media to a public audience, he may even be inciting mob violence.  That may be grounds for charging him under 18 U.S. Code § 2102.

It is hard to believe that a public office holder, a State Representative, would be serious about calling for the torture, murder, and mutilation of those who remove monuments.

Oliver has to clarify -- was he serious, or was he just throwing around inflammatory language to express his anger?

{{Update}} Oliver has deleted the post as of 22 May 2017.