The termination and subsequent unemployment is not 'paid' directly from the employer. It is paid by the state, but can be charged back to the rate of unemployment the employer pays to the state. It serves as an encouragement for the employer to not terminate employees without reason. To eliminate any incentive, employers could (and some do anyway) terminate employees before they become eligible for benefits, retirement or medical coverage 'just because'. I don't agree with those sorts of practices.
Nope. Employment is a mutually agreed exchange of value between two parties. An employer offers a job with a given value (money, stock, etc) and an employee offers their labor (brains, manual skills, etc) in exchange for the value the employer offers. No potential employee has 'the right' to force an employer to hire him or her, just as no potential employer has 'the right' to force an employee to work for them. The first, despite gov't sanctions for certain groups of people, is extortion and the second is enslavement.
No. It is a perfectly sensible statement for anyone who has actually owned/run a business. I can see where it would be totally senseless for someone on the outside looking in who doesn't know the first thing about owning/running a business. There are any number of internet sources that can explain the concept of insurance to you. Aside from that, the employee paid the insurance. After all, it is part of their employee benefits as mandated by law. The fact that the employee in all likelihood did not pay the insurance premiums directly themselves does not mean they aren't covered or that they didn't pay for it.
