A decade ago, a lot of folks would probably seriously consider this. Austin is a rad town and cost of living is cheaper than San Diego. Now moving to Texas could put you at significant risk if you’re a woman.
Apple, a company that likes to value diversity and inclusion, is apparently fine with putting its female employees in harm’s way for a tax break.
Of all the shit Apple has done, this is particularly disturbing.
Edit: Took a few more minutes to look into this, and it appears that Apple covers travel and medical expenses for women that have to travel out of state for care. Although, forcing someone into that position to keep their job is pretty douchey.
Or build a blue city on the triple-border of South Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming. Property is crazy cheap there. It’s the perfect place for a big “blue utopia” city.
Because of those states’ small population, just a small number of Democratic votes there could yield three states’ electoral votes and six senators.
Republicans would lose forever if Democrats didn’t gerrymander themselves into the coasts.
IIRC some red states have already floated the idea of not letting people vote for several years after moving there specifically to ensure that Republicans never lose control.
The topic was cost of living. Then someone mentioned it AND taxes. Then this person replied to the cost of living part.
Seems weird to read this conversation and see the claim bias and goalpost moving. They very clearly are not shifting anything.
Also you’re making a pretty wild assumption that by stating facts with evidence that they’re “biased”. Don’t be that guy/girl. I hate it when conservatives do that too.
Even covering expenses still puts women’s lives at risk.
Sure if you get pregnant and early on decide you want one, they can help out, AFTER you divulge very private information.
But what about all the myriad of other scenarios where people need medical abortions in life threatening situations. You don’t always have the time to get yourself to another state, and then you die, or lose the ability to get pregnant again.
Sure its nice they offer it, but fuck them for putting women in that situation anyway. They don’t get a pass for covering costs when they can.
A decade ago, a lot of folks would probably seriously consider this. Austin is a rad town and cost of living is cheaper than San Diego. Now moving to Texas could put you at significant risk if you’re a woman.
Apple, a company that likes to value diversity and inclusion, is apparently fine with putting its female employees in harm’s way for a tax break.
Of all the shit Apple has done, this is particularly disturbing.
Edit: Took a few more minutes to look into this, and it appears that Apple covers travel and medical expenses for women that have to travel out of state for care. Although, forcing someone into that position to keep their job is pretty douchey.
Austin isn’t even that much cheaper and property tax in TX is heinous compared to CA.
all the tech companies should move to another smaller city in a blue state all at once. turn Salem OR or something into the next big tech hub
Or build a blue city on the triple-border of South Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming. Property is crazy cheap there. It’s the perfect place for a big “blue utopia” city.
Because of those states’ small population, just a small number of Democratic votes there could yield three states’ electoral votes and six senators.
Republicans would lose forever if Democrats didn’t gerrymander themselves into the coasts.
IIRC some red states have already floated the idea of not letting people vote for several years after moving there specifically to ensure that Republicans never lose control.
Not cheaper at all, actually. They only discuss income tax when folks claim that.
Austin is cheaper than San Diego, even excluding taxes:
https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=United+States&city1=Austin%2C+TX&city2=San+Diego%2C+CA
Also, the topic was taxes, not cost of living. But it is understandable that when folks can’t justify their bias they simply shift the goal posts.
Pay is higher in CA so that isn’t the smug data point you thought it was.
The topic was cost of living. Then someone mentioned it AND taxes. Then this person replied to the cost of living part.
Seems weird to read this conversation and see the claim bias and goalpost moving. They very clearly are not shifting anything.
Also you’re making a pretty wild assumption that by stating facts with evidence that they’re “biased”. Don’t be that guy/girl. I hate it when conservatives do that too.
Nope it is Taxes for the Company. The Company cares not one whit for the CoL of their Employees except when it affects the quality.
Bullshit.
They don’t give a shit.
It’s something of importance to their target demographic, so they play into it.
Even covering expenses still puts women’s lives at risk.
Sure if you get pregnant and early on decide you want one, they can help out, AFTER you divulge very private information.
But what about all the myriad of other scenarios where people need medical abortions in life threatening situations. You don’t always have the time to get yourself to another state, and then you die, or lose the ability to get pregnant again.
Sure its nice they offer it, but fuck them for putting women in that situation anyway. They don’t get a pass for covering costs when they can.
With a 2% chance of an ectopic pregnancy, it’s a little like Russian Roulette if you’re of childbearing age, isn’t it?