>We're living in different worlds.
Likely, I am a Geo-Libertarian Agorist that believes in a society free from Statism and Coercion by Government
>While you seem to like to live for yourself, I live in a society. Moreover, I live in a social country (and more important: A social culture) in which the line isn't as clear as you'd like it to be.
I believe in voluntary society, and not forces socialization. Which is what a "social country" is, especially a democracy where under ideal conditions 50.1% of the population impose their will on the 49.9%.
>Your definition of employment seems rather limited from my personal point of view.
I use logic, and reason to define employment, not emotion. Most people are driven by their emotion not by logic.
>If you hire someone, train someone, potentially socialize with someone, you have a contract with a person not a wage slave.
you have a contract for them to proved the labor you need in your business.
Pay, benefits, etc are all designed to attract the best talent to give the business the best value for their labor dollar. As such it seems illogical to me to attract people that desire to get paid to do no labor. Etsy and all of the other companies that have been pressured into offering this policy by the pubic are betting on very few people actually making use of said benefit, and the ones that do not actually taking the full 26 weeks, I can not image a company surviving several employees all at once deciding to take 50% of the year off, paid.
This is one of the High PR Value, but in reality will likely be low cost HR benefits to attract people, likely offer them lower base salary so they get the "feel good" benefit of 26 week maternity leave they will likely never use.
Further it could limit their talent pool as people like me would not be likely to to accept employment unless there are other benefits that would be applicable to non-child employees. Offering 26 weeks of leave for having a child is meaningless to me, and will not entice me to join Etsy as an employee, and unless there is something to counter balance it will actively deter my willingness to work for them
>In short, your argument seems rather egocentric
Employment is egocentric, no one works for the "good of humanity" every one works to support themselves. People may find other reasons and motivations with in the employment, but very few would continue working for their employer under a "I won the lottery" situation.