Sitting at home
So restaurants can’t find workers and (Republican) bystanders are saying, “Is anyone surprised they can’t find workers when people can make more sitting at home?”
How do I get me some of that “sitting at home” money? Don’t you have to be fired first? You can’t just quit your job, not in North Carolina.
Anyway, I can guarantee that the people passing that cliché around have never worked in a restaurant.
Aside from the threat of catching COVID in tight quarters, it’s hard work, it pays low wages, it has no benefits, no medical insurance. Schedules are terrible and you have to put up with a high percentage of customers who are jerks. (They say snotty things like, “Why work when you can make more sitting at home?”)
The free market response to a lack of workers is to raise the salary. Has anyone tried that yet?
A reversal of policies
Critical race theory was inspired by Marxism, specifically the conflict between workers and capitalists. But instead of focusing on class conflict, CRT deals with racial conflict.
A central tenet of the theory is the claim that racism is systemic in American society. It permeates our culture, creating conflict between the oppressor and the oppressed.
In response, CRT encourages racial discrimination against the oppressor. According to the movement’s spokesman, Ibram X. Kendi, “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.”
This approach toward race relations has resulted in an unfortunate trend on college campuses called resegregation within dormitories, recreation areas, etc. It represents a reversal of the integration policies of the civil rights movement. It is a repudiation of the Rev. Martin Luther King’s vision of a nation where people are judged by their character, not their race. According to CRT, not only are we defined by our race, our future is determined by it.
CRT presents negative, divisive view of race relations. As former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett observed, if we continue to promote this theory in schools, “We may lose our country.”
This letter is in response to the May 1 letter “Support the police.” I agree that police should be recognized for the hard and often thankless job they do. But I maintain that the actions of renegades like Derek Chauvin and others are just as important.
According to The Washington Post, about 1,000 civilians are killed by police every year. This number has been constant over five years. In comparison, the website Officer Down Memorial Page (odmp.org) shows that 362 police officers were killed in the line of duty in 2020.
Officer deaths are tragic and should be noted. But a similar concern should be for the far greater number of civilians shot to death by police officers.
‘Dictate of the day’
I truly don’t know what to make of the May 2 letter “Falling in line” in which the writer claims “I truly don’t understand the lock-step behavior of people these days who are actually anxious to fall in line with the dictate of the day.” Wouldn’t it matter what the “dictate of the day” was?
There’s a difference between wearing red sneakers because it’s a popular fad and wearing a mask because there’s a deadly airborne pandemic that’s easily transmissible. It would be a mistake to dismiss the second as a “dictate of the day” as if it were just some benign fashion statement — or a political statement. If reliable medical authorities say it’s necessary — which they have — then I’m happy to follow that “dictate” and increase my chances of staying alive and keeping my neighbors alive.