Letters to the Editor 03/30/2016

To the Editor:

In response to Dave Marlow's March 23 letter to the editor on a $15-per-hour minimum wage, I agree 100 percent.

We're seeing an unprecedented number of goodies that liberal Democrats are promising without a single thought given to unintended consequences. Liberals' new "purchase votes initiatives" include $15 minimum wage, free college, free medical, and entitlement to what they determine as their fair share.

My first job at 12 years old picking beans paid .025 per pound, and you made what you worked for. There was no splitting up the total at the end of the day to make sure everyone was entitled to "his or her fair share." When I turned 16, I was able to land summer jobs at minimum wage of $1 per hour to $1.25 per hour. Of course that was 50-plus years ago. However, I NEVER imagined minimum wage was going to entitle me to a "living wage," buy a house, raise a family, and live the American dream.

America is the greatest country in the world when it comes to self-directed opportunity.

The stories are endless of those who made good choices, worked hard and "earned" their success.

Oprah Winfrey is one example.

How is it that I'm entitled to one cent of what she worked hard for in the name of fairness? Michael Jordan is also very rich, and he earned it by hard work and utilizing his God-given talent.

So help me understand why I'm entitled to one cent of his fortune in the name of fairness? Bill Gates and his partner started Microsoft from nothing.

Today it's a multinational company providing thousands of high-paying jobs.

Again, tell me why I would be entitled to one cent of their amazing accomplishment in the name of fairness.

Those aiming to turn our country upside down in the name of fairness and entitlement may have noble goals, but the results will be disastrous. What our country needs is competent leadership that will unleash the power of free enterprise by eliminating stifling regulations and taxes that drive job-creators offshore and upholding our immigration laws to protect American workers.

Jeff Mackey

•••

To the Editor:

Dave Marlow's letter to the editor on March 22, 2016 regarding the minimum-wage bill starts off with "liberal, socialistic democrats infesting the current Oregon legislature," followed by what could have been a review of contrast of both the good and the bad related to minimum-wage increases.

But instead what I read was a political preface followed by blah-blah-blah that we so frequently see from someone reposting opinions that may or may not hold any water at all. And not much in the way of actual evidence to support any of the claims.

My first job paid something like $2.40 per hour many years ago, consistent with the minimum wage at the time; would that be a better wage to set it at for today's economy?

I'm not going to advocate for either side, but as a small vineyard owner that hires contract labor that are paid a couple bucks over the minimums according to my vineyard manager, I neither resent paying the slight increase that will occur over the next few years, nor do I see the affects that are alluded to in the letter. Ag work in particular is tough work, and these folks (men and women) are getting paid fairly, but the contractor still cannot find enough qualified people at wage rates above the minimum wage requirement.

Straw man arguments and catch phrases like "job killing" just don't work for me. There are subtle affects that will occur, that I'm sure of, but statements like "removing job opportunities" immediately makes me think this is just a politically driven puff piece rather than any cogent set of arguments against this legislation.

Yes, our legislature includes citizen legislators - if you don't like what they've done, why not try running so you can affect change? But if you do, you might want to change how your publications sound, as at least some of us don't rise to that sort of bait.

Randy McCall