Is Paid Leave (family/sick/vacation) or Single-payer healthcare better for Dems?

[Blue3]

Which is better for the Dems to focus on?

[bagelman]

Paid leave could put pressure on poorer businesses to reduce wages or lay off workers. Single payer healthcare wouldn't require poorer businesses to pay more than their fair share, instead rich people who have the ability to pay a fair share of taxes would pay

[Famous Mortimer]

Paid leave would either result in most small businesses going out of business (bad change) or most small business being given an exemption (so really the policy would have no impact at all).

Obviously healthcare, which would have an immediate, positive effect on everyone.

[The Other Castro]

For winning elections, single payer is probably a better mobilizer of voters.

[MAINEiac4434]

Both are good, both would move votes, and both should be part of the Democratic platform that should be shouted from the rooftops in 2020.

I am leaning paid leave, however, because I feel like at least 80% hate their jobs and more paid time off for them would be super appealing.

One could also make the argument that paid leave could create jobs, because with more people getting more time off, companies would have to hire more people to replace them.

[PoliticalShelter]

The one that wouldn't cause massive amount of disruption toward people's healthcare situation.

[Blue3]

This is a lot tighter than when single-payer was compared to free college and $15 minimum wage...

[Blue3]

Thoughts now?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Paid leave could put pressure on poorer businesses to reduce wages or lay off workers. Single payer healthcare wouldn't require poorer businesses to pay more than their fair share, instead rich people who have the ability to pay a fair share of taxes would pay

You could structure paid leave so that it is a tax-funded insurance policy rather than each business being on the hook for it themselves. 

For businesses that don't already give their employees' generous health care policies, the tax increases for single-payer would be a much bigger cost than paid leave.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Both are good, both would move votes, and both should be part of the Democratic platform that should be shouted from the rooftops in 2020.

I am leaning paid leave, however, because I feel like at least 80% hate their jobs and more paid time off for them would be super appealing.

One could also make the argument that paid leave could create jobs, because with more people getting more time off, companies would have to hire more people to replace them.

[bagelman]

Paid leave could put pressure on poorer businesses to reduce wages or lay off workers. Single payer healthcare wouldn't require poorer businesses to pay more than their fair share, instead rich people who have the ability to pay a fair share of taxes would pay

You could structure paid leave so that it is a tax-funded insurance policy rather than each business being on the hook for it themselves. 

For businesses that don't already give their employees' generous health care policies, the tax increases for single-payer would be a much bigger cost than paid leave.

That's a better way to do it. If all businesses have to pay for it, small business owners would balk - not just the sexist ones.

Paid leave would appeal strongly to bicoastal suburbanites with white collar jobs. To market a policy like PL Democrats need to structure it so it doesn't hurt small midwestern businesses.