The reasoning behind this argument is not about the cliff. The fact that much weaker economies with much lower infrastructure and political stability, STILL AFFORD SOME paid family leave is what the argument is about. It is an argument about “spending other people’s money”, where you underline that the cost is affordable in places where you wouldn’t imagine.
It is not a strong argument, but at least do it justice and interpret it right.
It is not a strong argument because the US has its own economy, a certain population, a certain landmass, a certain legal framework for doing business, because the US strives to keep the private sector its own thing and meddle with it as little as possible and so on and so forth, while all the other examples are socialist mostly, places where the government hires A LOT of people or, even worse, places where the parental paid leave is paid horribly low or even unpaid, that is paid “on paper”.
So, yes a very bad argument, but not because the US needs to choose independently. It is very much ok to copy successful programs, at least to test them. But it is not ok to say there is any similarity between Vietnam providing paid family leave and the US providing paid family leave. They are not the same thing.