When you add it all up, it costs $74,000 to put $44,000 in Sally’s pocket and to give her $12,000 in benefits. Bottom line: Governments impose a 33% surtax on Sally’s job each year.
You can read the gory details in Michael’s article, but that quote encapsulates the problem: government impositions in the form of health-care costs and other programs (and, really, it’s all a form of taxation, however they dress it up) increase the cost of each new hire to the business – it’s more than just salary. And the new burdens imposed by ObamaCare have, in Mr. Fleischer’s case, put the cost of hiring more employees beyond what it makes sense for his company to pay.
Hence, thanks to the progressive-statist program of President Obama and the congressional Democrats, the very forces that would work to lower unemployment are instead stifled. Is this what we voted for?
Thankfully, we can start correcting the mistake this November.
(via Sister Toldjah)
RELATED: For an excellent book on an earlier time when government’s anti-business policies kept people out of work, read Amity Shlaes’ The Forgotten Man: a new history of the Great Depression.
UPDATE: MichaelW at QandO has the best summation of this situation:
…when the government continually raises the costs of doing business in the first place (or threatens to do so), the only ones who really survive are either the politically connected or the very wealthy (yes, they are often the same thing). That doesn’t have anything to do with building a better mousetrap, as it were, or growing the economy. And it certainly doesn’t do anything to raise everyone’s standard of living. Instead, all it does is reward those closest to the rule-makers, thus creating more competition to be closest to the King rather than satisfying the marketplace. It is exactly the sort of crony-capitalism we claim to detest.