Sounding off: Raising minimum wage would be economic stimulus

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’ net worth is $177 billion. The three heirs to Walmart saw their fortunes grow last year by $40.7 billion. Thousands of Amazon and Walmart employees’ incomes are so low that they qualify for food stamps, meaning that taxpayers subsidize these booming businesses. Think of that — we middle-class taxpayers are subsidizing employees of people who not only are billionaires, but have wealth of over $100 billion. That is why Democrats are fighting for an increase in the minimum wage.

Raising the minimum wage would be a massive and much-needed economic stimulus that would directly benefit many of the most vulnerable workers. We must begin to reduce our obscene inequality in wealth and taxes. We must push forward to a system where everyone pays their fair share of taxes, and where worker compensation is fair and just.

American workers should not be a few steps away from servitude. Redistributing money upwards must stop.

Sandy Kremer, Youngwood

Politicians divide and conquer

Ask yourself, who benefits from division? In a recent appearance on TNT, prior to a Final Four match-up, Charles Barkley commented that, “Politicians divide Black, white, rich and poor Americans.” Barkley also stated, “ I think most white people and Black people are great people.” He added his belief that that our system is set up so that politicians, both Democrat and Republican, make us not like each other so they can keep their grasp of money and power. “They divide and conquer,” he added.

In summary, he points out quite clearly the problem in blindly following these politicians, who in truth are sowing and benefiting from the division of colors, classes, ages, sexes, etc. And they’re getting average Americans (and their cronies in the media) to do their bidding for them.

It’s shocking that such good and commonsense advice somehow made it to the airwaves. I’m stunned his microphone wasn’t cut. “Saying it like it is” in today’s America is frowned upon. Yeah, yeah, freedom of speech, blah, blah, blah … sure. Dream on, but, that’s another story.

As folks bicker back and forth on these pages and elsewhere, on the evils of the “other party” and the “other side’s politicians,” perhaps think about the wisdom of Barkley’s words. Who exactly are the puppets and who are the puppet masters?

Wake up, America! Perhaps you’re all correct?

Tim Kaczmarek, Natrona Heights

Questions to ask politicians

Residents of the swamp are noted for grabbing the nearest media horn and feeding the flock a diatribe of crap about current issues. What gets my dander up is that we have no chance to question them on anything they say. Here are some questions I would ask:

1. How can a “devout” Roman Catholic be an advocate for abortion?

2. A provision in the stimulus bill provides farmers of color a payment of 120% of their mortgage balance while a white farmer in a similar financial situation does not qualify. How is that not racial discrimination? Is the purpose of the 20% premium to satisfy downpayment requirements on a new mortgage on the same property?

3. With over 600,000 abortions performed annually in the U.S., what is the reasoning behind opening the southern border to some 18,000 (year to date) unaccompanied migrant children so they may begin a new life in this country?

4. Why is it a valid proposition that gender cannot be established at birth when looking at this simple explanation: Male: penis, sperm; female: vagina, ovum?

5. How will taking transgenders into the military, and adding women to the Special Forces, Rangers and Seals, increase the effectiveness of our armed forces in carrying out “boots on the ground” combat missions?

6. What was the purpose of awarding the $1,400 stimulus payment to incarcerated persons?

Maybe some of your readers could offer their input as to the reasoning behind the issues that prompted these questions.

Ken Mowl, Derry

National voting system would work

The solution to the voter rights issue is right before our eyes. Instead of each state hashing out its personal biased voting rights situations, we should adopt a basic national system of voting.

All we have to do is to copy what our fellow North American neighbors already have in place. Adopt a system that requires an identification card or process, just as Mexico and Canada currently have in place.

Anyone can Google each nation’s requirements for voting and find out that both require prepared picture identification cards, with Canada allowing some additional modifications but still a legal identity procedure. There doesn’t seem to be any controversy in either of the countries.

Let’s apply a little common sense for once and adopt a national system that is consistent with what works in our neighboring countries.

Russell Ridenbaugh, New Castle

Consistency needed in ballot counting

Let me start by saying I am against no- reason mail-in voting. My feeling is that a perfectly healthy person should not be too lazy to go vote in person. Covid fear was no excuse, because many people stood in line longer than most polling places just to turn in their ballots.

I also do not believe there was widespread voter fraud. We were bombarded with ads to vote by mail, very clearly outlining the requirements and stating that if they were not followed, votes would not count.

I believe the whole problem was certain districts choosing to ignore the requirements and count improperly signed or dated ballots and when challenged, judges ruled in their favor, stating that a voter should not be disenfranchised over a minor error. Remember the Brewster-Ziccarelli contest decided by a few votes? Allegheny County decided to count mail-in ballots from people who had neglected to write the date on the back of the mailing envelope; Westmoreland chose not to count such ballots. Brewster won by a narrow margin.

We cannot have this happening again. We need very clear and precise instructions to all vote counters on what is and is not valid, and all must use the same rules. Either these ballots count or they don’t, but it must be consistent or we will continue to hear fraud claims.

Ronald Wylie, Lower Burrell

Don’t bully others for vaccine decisions

To letter-writer Paul Heckbert (“Republicans making sacrifice by refusing vaccine”: It is no secret that we are living in a volatile time. Most days in the Opinion section, I read yet another surprising comment by someone on either side of the political aisle. This particular one was appalling and very sad. Wow, did you read this before you sent it?

I have a quote that I like to refer to: “The real art of conversation is not only to say the right thing in the right place, but to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment.” You assume only Republicans are not getting the vaccine. I know many Republicans and Democrats who have been vaccinated.

Some of those who were first to be vaccinated have a complete intolerance for anyone waiting to make the decision to be vaccinated. I wonder if the women who had the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, after adverse reactions, would make the same decision again?

There is still much we do not know about the virus and the vaccines. I still live in a free country with the ability to make my own choices, and I would like to do so without being bullied and to have my decision, whatever it is, respected by all.

I hope you were taught, as I have taught my children, to never assume. We all know what that means. I support those who have chosen to vaccinate and those who have chosen to wait or not vaccinate. I would ask you to do the same.

Shari Kelly, Greensburg

Background checks keep guns out of the wrong hands

Andrew Ridilla’s letter (“What gun control is really about”) causes me to picture him barricaded in his basement with an arsenal of weapons, ready to defend against an invasion by the U.S. government. In reality, he is, and we are, more in danger going to the supermarket or movie theater, or sending our children to school. Why? Because this is where those who shouldn’t be able to purchase a weapon often strike.

In 2020, 25,000 Pennsylvanians were denied a gun purchase due to a prohibiting factor such as a felony conviction. The only thing that stopped them was a background check.

House Resolution 8 will help keep guns out of the wrong hands by ensuring that anyone who attempts to purchase a firearm undergoes a background check. Currently in Pennsylvania, private sellers are not required to run background checks on the sale of long guns, while licensed dealers must do so for these same weapons. Why should some sellers have requirements that others do not?

Join the 88% of Pennsylvanians who support stronger background checks, and support HR 8 and state House Bill 235 and Senate Bill 88 to end this dangerous private-seller exemption.

Ridilla’s comparison to communist regimes is baseless fearmongering. Canada, Australia, the U.K. and New Zealand — Western democracies similar to ours — have passed gun violence prevention policies that save lives without becoming tyrannical regimes. We formed a government “of, for and by the people” to protect the lives of citizens.

Right now, our government is failing at that basic mandate.

Joanie Foran, Franklin Park