PUTTING PROFIT ABOVE WELFARE
As we move into the new year, I am hopeful that the public and our political class are coming to terms with income inequality in America and the harm it is doing to our economy and society. At the same time, I am disappointed in the response by my party, the Democratic Party, to overreaching economic issues of our time.
While raising the minimum wage would do more good than harm, simply raising the minimum wage would help too few people, too little, and could create inequities of its own.
More importantly, the minimum wage is a placebo, a distraction from the real labor market forces at work that is bringing the ideal of America as a broad-base middle-class nation to a close.
Our government over the last 30 years has pursued policies by way of trade agreements, cheap foreign labor embedded in the goods imported to the U.S., and an immigration policy of non-enforcement, to increase the supply of labor in the United States.
Globalization has been an abject failure for the American middle class. When President Clinton supported NAFTA, he sold out to a corporate establishment and took the Democratic Party’s labor market policy 180 degrees in the wrong direction. Increasing the supply of labor into the U.S. market has had a predictable and, for some, a desired result. While corporate profits are at record highs, the value of labor in the market has been diminished to the point where a full-time job no longer provides a place in the middle class.
For a party that holds the moral high ground on so many important issues, it sickens me to see Democrats pandering to foreign nationals who have intentionally broken our immigration law in order to gain an electoral advantage, and to a corporate establishment that is willing to put short-term profits above the welfare of their employees and their own customers.
It is my new year wish that the Democratic Party will set aside the interest of foreign nationals and big campaign contributors and return to their core values of supporting a strong and prosperous middle-class.
treasurer, Hancock County Democrats
SYNDICATED WRITERS NEED TO BE REPLACED
As a suggestion to boost Courier readership, I would submit eliminating the columns of Kathleen Parker, Ruth Marcus, Cal Thomas, and E.J. Dionne and substituting editorials from local experts concerning topics that would actually benefit our community.
The slanted and biased ramblings of these so-called journalists are simply a waste of time, containing very little concrete facts and research and way too much of their inflated personal egos.
For me, the final straw on the proverbial camel’s back came with Kathleen Parker’s column of Jan. 7, when she referred to the many lies of the current administration as “misstatements of true-ish-ness.” HUH!
Does anyone need any further proof that political correctness is running amok and that each side slants its writings so much that no one can tell what is actually happening anymore? It serves no purpose to spend the time needed to read this stuff.
How about a column on the arts by Phil Sugden? Or physical fitness articles by Jim Steffen? Or marketing tips from Michele Franks or David Trisel? Or motivation and sports performance by yours truly?
Or senior care by any of our local retirement communities? Or helping students succeed by a local school administrators? Or dealing with depression or addictions with local mental health professionals?
Or video production by KC Allen? Or a daily nutritional menu we could all follow instead of giving millions of dollars to NutriSystem?
Or one daily column that explicitly stresses only the positive stories happening locally and around the country — stories of courage, hope, compassion and success!
Wow, the possibilities are limitless. You could use any of the numerous local experts available, except Terry Cook, who already has his own column. What an idea, a local paper serving its local community featuring local talent!
I may start that myself. Hmmmm.
If anyone agrees with this concept, then take action and let The Courier know. It is possible we could get something started that will begin everyone’s day with a smile and a warm feeling along with some information that would contribute to their daily success and happiness — items that are in very short supply lately.
Happy successful new year everyone!
Bruce Boguski Findlay
HOSPICE ISN’T A NONPROFIT
It was with discouragement that I read the article, “Read all about it,” in the Jan. 7 edition of The Courier (Page A6).
Bridge Hospice is a for-profit hospice. For-profit hospices exist as any for-profit corporation exists — to garner revenue for stakeholders.
Nonprofit hospices do exist. Bridge Hospice is not one of them.
For both the patient and caregiver, the distinction is huge.