I understand where you're coming from Farwest. But why is it the business owner (or management) responsibility to make sure they have something to show for their years of work?
Don't get me wrong I believe both have some. But in your example what does the business owner have to show for it if he goes out of business. Should the employees chip in and save him? Or in the current climate, should the taxpayers bail him (and the employees) out?
I had a good friend die 5 years short of retirement a few years back. He never added anything more to his 401k than the required minimum and only had the life insurance that the union had negotiated the company buy (he could have added to that too). And it's sad, he would have left nothing if it wasn't done for him. So you could say the union was worth it for him. He wouldn't save a dime, but always had a new truck, more house than his fellow employees and all the latest gadgets. Which was his right. Now his wife has had to sell it all. Is that the company's fault (he worked there 27+ years)? It shows you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. All the tools were there for him to have something to show for his work but he had the freedom to choose not to take advantage of them. Should he (us) lose that right (the right to fail) too?
It's tuff out there. That's why employees and employers should save for a rainy day. If not, the market place will swallow you whole.
Just my over simplified opinion
Don't get me wrong I believe both have some. But in your example what does the business owner have to show for it if he goes out of business. Should the employees chip in and save him? Or in the current climate, should the taxpayers bail him (and the employees) out?
I had a good friend die 5 years short of retirement a few years back. He never added anything more to his 401k than the required minimum and only had the life insurance that the union had negotiated the company buy (he could have added to that too). And it's sad, he would have left nothing if it wasn't done for him. So you could say the union was worth it for him. He wouldn't save a dime, but always had a new truck, more house than his fellow employees and all the latest gadgets. Which was his right. Now his wife has had to sell it all. Is that the company's fault (he worked there 27+ years)? It shows you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. All the tools were there for him to have something to show for his work but he had the freedom to choose not to take advantage of them. Should he (us) lose that right (the right to fail) too?
It's tuff out there. That's why employees and employers should save for a rainy day. If not, the market place will swallow you whole.
Just my over simplified opinion