This Is Who Corporate America Is

 

Corporate America never offered this money as a bonus to working single moms. They never offered this money to newly expecting mothers and fathers. They never offered this money to newly married employees. They never offered this money to employees who lose weight. They never offered this money to help their employees with health issues.  They could have. They could have made this a positive incentive for all kinds of wholesome behavior.

Instead their generosity only extends to wanting to slaughter your child in the womb. No more tax breaks for these people. This $4,000 and a lot more should be confiscated and given to single moms or people who clean themselves up. Anything is better than leaving it in the hands of our degenerate business class.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 80 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Hugh Member
    Hugh
    @Hugh

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave.  Smart business move.

    • #1
  2. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    The real insult here is that the taxpayer could be subsidizing this.  

    Introduced by Rubio:

    S. 4131

    Tax Breaks for Radical Corporate Activism Act

    This bill disallows a business expense tax deduction for any reimbursement paid by an employer to an employee for travel expenses to obtain an abortion, or for the costs of any gender transition procedure for the employee’s minor child.

    • #2
  3. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    Unless one is currently working in BigCorporate, you cannot imagine the mischief the New young HR women are wreaking. It’s enormously destructive and increasingly hindering actual productivity and creativity in serious US businesses. No one (like the Boards or CEO’s they report to) is willing to say no to these women. And they seem as vicious as the stereotype (and often actual) mean and  catty, vindictive high school girls of old. And now, too, I suppose. 

    • #3
  4. E. Kent Golding Member
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    Big Corporate loves Gay people because they tend not to have families that interfere with long work hours and travel.   Can’t have any priorities other than The Company & The Career.

    • #4
  5. DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax)
    @DonG

    EODmom (View Comment):
    New young HR women

    can’t that function be outsourced to China, where they know how to treat employees efficiently?

    • #5
  6. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    EODmom (View Comment):
    New young HR women

    can’t that function be outsourced to China, where they know how to treat employees efficiently?

    I know you’re being facetious, but the power of the New HR – and the budgets they control – means it ain’t goin’ nowhere. Too much grift to dole out. Anyone is a consultant charging $300-500/ hr these days. Myers/Briggs workshops got nothing on these people. Anyone can do it – provided they know an HR VP. 

    • #6
  7. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Glen, I agree with you on the abortion point.

    I disagree about subsidizing single motherhood.  Why would you want to do that?

    • #7
  8. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    So nice of them to pay for this out of their own pocket. I wonder where that money will come from though. 

    • #8
  9. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    I am finding that LinkedIn is the wokest place on the internet, except maybe for ESPN. How did that happen?

    • #9
  10. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Hugh (View Comment):

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave. Smart business move.

    @hugh has it right here. The corporation gets the benefit of avoiding maternity leave costs (which often involve getting a temp in to cover for the woman), getting the asset (i.e., the woman) back to work quickly (minimal lost productivity), and the corporation looks better to the looney left. Why wouldn’t the corporation cover this? After all, the Board has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to maximize the return to said shareholders.

    Of course, the proper move would be for shareholders to raise a stink to the board about such a policy. That might move them. Or it might not.

    • #10
  11. 9thDistrictNeighbor Member
    9thDistrictNeighbor
    @9thDistrictNeighbor

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Glen, I agree with you on the abortion point.

    I disagree about subsidizing single motherhood. Why would you want to do that?

    Hugh (View Comment):

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave. Smart business move.

    How about we let the baby be born?  Many, many couples wishing, hoping, praying to adopt.

    • #11
  12. Headedwest Coolidge
    Headedwest
    @Headedwest

    I stopped doing business with Dick’s a while ago. I prefer retailers like this:

    • #12
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Headedwest (View Comment):

    I stopped doing business with Dick’s a while ago. I prefer retailers like this:

    I would like to buy an AR-15 from them.  But I prefer dealing with private parties.

    • #13
  14. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    9thDistrictNeighbor (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Glen, I agree with you on the abortion point.

    I disagree about subsidizing single motherhood. Why would you want to do that?

    Hugh (View Comment):

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave. Smart business move.

    How about we let the baby be born? Many, many couples wishing, hoping, praying to adopt.

    This is a good point, and I’m guessing that you know the problem is that a lot of those couples are . . . (wait for it) . . . Christians!

    • #14
  15. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Hugh (View Comment):

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave. Smart business move.

    When Tucker Carlson started talking about this a few weeks ago, I thought it might be B.S..  D*mned if he wasn’t right.

    • #15
  16. E. Kent Golding Member
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    9thDistrictNeighbor (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Glen, I agree with you on the abortion point.

    I disagree about subsidizing single motherhood. Why would you want to do that?

    Hugh (View Comment):

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave. Smart business move.

    How about we let the baby be born? Many, many couples wishing, hoping, praying to adopt.

    That would be the moral, kind thing to do.   Whatever do morals and kindness have to do with the bottom line?

    • #16
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    9thDistrictNeighbor (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Glen, I agree with you on the abortion point.

    I disagree about subsidizing single motherhood. Why would you want to do that?

    Hugh (View Comment):

    $4000 is a lot cheaper than having to deal with the cost associated with maternity leave. Smart business move.

    How about we let the baby be born? Many, many couples wishing, hoping, praying to adopt.

    That would be the moral, kind thing to do. Whatever do morals and kindness have to do with the bottom line?

    Because if you stop being moral and kind – indeed, if you start doing the exact opposite – a lot of customers may not be customers any more?

    • #17
  18. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    It really doesn’t bother me that much when I consider that states can make up their own (collective) minds about what goes on in their borders and I can make up my own mind about who I buy from. 

    • #18
  19. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    If the girl decided instead to have the baby and give it up for adoption, will Dick’s help out with her expenses up to $4,000?

    Or will they only be satisfied if she agrees to kill it?

    • #19
  20. Nathanael Ferguson Contributor
    Nathanael Ferguson
    @NathanaelFerguson

    I haven’t set foot in a Dick’s store in years. When they outed themselves as anti-2A, I quit giving them business. 

    • #20
  21. Nathanael Ferguson Contributor
    Nathanael Ferguson
    @NathanaelFerguson

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    If the girl decided instead to have the baby and give it up for adoption, will Dick’s help out with her expenses up to $4,000?

    Or will they only be satisfied if she agrees to kill it?

    That is an excellent question.

    • #21
  22. E. Kent Golding Member
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    If the girl decided instead to have the baby and give it up for adoption, will Dick’s help out with her expenses up to $4,000?

    Or will they only be satisfied if she agrees to kill it?

    You knew the answer when you asked….

    • #22
  23. E. Kent Golding Member
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    Nathanael Ferguson (View Comment):

    I haven’t set foot in a Dick’s store in years. When they outed themselves as anti-2A, I quit giving them business.

    I reduced giving them business.   Usually I can find the item somewhere else.

    • #23
  24. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    Not that I frequented this store much, but I’ll never set another toe in their store from this day forward…….

    • #24
  25. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Nathanael Ferguson (View Comment):

    I haven’t set foot in a Dick’s store in years. When they outed themselves as anti-2A, I quit giving them business.

    Not just guns, but the whole hunting section is gone. Bows, arrows, targets, I guess they don’t want to encourage any mass crossbow shooting.

    • #25
  26. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Big Corporate loves Gay people because they tend not to have families that interfere with long work hours and travel. Can’t have any priorities other than The Company & The Career.

    Remember when Buttigieg took three months off to bond with his adopted children during the middle of the ports crisis?

    • #26
  27. E. Kent Golding Member
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Big Corporate loves Gay people because they tend not to have families that interfere with long work hours and travel. Can’t have any priorities other than The Company & The Career.

    Remember when Buttigieg took three months off to bond with his adopted children during the middle of the ports crisis?

    Yeah.   Odd.   I am not sure many Gays want to adopt children.

    • #27
  28. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Big Corporate loves Gay people because they tend not to have families that interfere with long work hours and travel. Can’t have any priorities other than The Company & The Career.

    Remember when Buttigieg took three months off to bond with his adopted children during the middle of the ports crisis?

    Yeah. Odd. I am not sure many Gays want to adopt children.

    There are some – I don’t know how many. Of those some, some would probably make great parents. 

    • #28
  29. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    TBA (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Big Corporate loves Gay people because they tend not to have families that interfere with long work hours and travel. Can’t have any priorities other than The Company & The Career.

    Remember when Buttigieg took three months off to bond with his adopted children during the middle of the ports crisis?

    Yeah. Odd. I am not sure many Gays want to adopt children.

    There are some – I don’t know how many. Of those some, some would probably make great parents.

    How about if the homosexual “couples” adopt older children rather than infants?

    • #29
  30. Hugh Member
    Hugh
    @Hugh

    kedavis (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    Big Corporate loves Gay people because they tend not to have families that interfere with long work hours and travel. Can’t have any priorities other than The Company & The Career.

    Remember when Buttigieg took three months off to bond with his adopted children during the middle of the ports crisis?

    Yeah. Odd. I am not sure many Gays want to adopt children.

    There are some – I don’t know how many. Of those some, some would probably make great parents.

    How about if the homosexual “couples” adopt older children rather than infants?

    Older kids are harder to indoctrinate 

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.