There is a very controversial argument that I just don’t understand. During the Democratic Debates, one of the ladies said “I can’t believe this is the 21st century and we’re still debating abortion.”

I would agree with that statement, but from the other side of the fence. I understand, as much as a man can, that pregnancy is a big deal for women. However, it’s also a big deal for that unborn individual. The smallest baby on record to survive was only 8.6 ounces when born. You can google “smallest baby” to see the story. Who knows, but that little girl may grow up and find the cure for cancer, or the common cold, or cleaner energy?

I’m not criticizing the choices people have had to make in the past, but looking at where our society is now and what it is capable of doing. I’m glad that baby will grow up to be a woman with a right to choose what her own life will become. How can civil people actually argue for the right to terminate life at or even after the moment of birth as is happening in Virginia?

As I’ve said before, let’s get to the point where we can sit down and talk in a civil way about the options for this critical problem in America. There has to be an answer between these two extremes with the great medical care we have available now.

There is a lot of hateful discourse in our social media these days, including that from politicians on both sides of the fence. I mentioned in a previous article that I don’t agree with President Trump 100 percent of the time. I don’t agree with my boss, my wife or my son 100 percent of the time, either.

One of the problems with social media, and even emails and newspaper editorials, is that there is no voice inflection and no visual clues like facial expressions or hand language to help the recipient interpret what the speaker is saying.

A lot of folks are interpreting some of President Trump’s comments as racist or white supremacist. His chosen Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Ben Carson, happens to be a black man and former contender for the presidential office. Secretary Carson has this to say: “I have never seen anything that even resembles racism. And look at the policies that have been done and look at the people who have been helped.”

He agrees that Trump’s policies have lowered black and Hispanic unemployment rates and created business opportunity zones in underprivileged areas of the country.

Carson also said he believes the low home ownership rate among African Americans is a result of the housing crisis a few years ago, where policies of previous administrations allowed manipulation of debt-to-income ratios and other credit games to put many people into homes they couldn’t actually afford.

When it comes time to vote for another presidential term, you will have to do your own research and determine if you think all elements of our society are better off now than they were four years ago.

Many families are not at the level we would like to see them at, of course, but are they headed in the right direction? Are more people working? Are wages in general higher and more business opportunities available under Trump’s policies? Make sure you are listening to more than just one news source, as any source can be one-sided.

Speaking of life styles and being better off, the House of Representatives recently passed a bill that would raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. This happened just days after the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan agency functioning to support congress with statistical data, concluded that 3.7 million wage earners would become unemployed if this passes.

I will point out that they also estimated 17 million people would see wage gains, but how significant are those incremental gains in relation to all the families that will lose everything as businesses cut back or close? How many restaurants or mom-and-pop hardware stores will be forced to raise prices to cover the higher costs?

This goes back to something I talked about a couple of months ago. Why do we need a federal minimum wage in the first place? Is the cost of rent in Bailey the same as the cost of rent in San Francisco? Having lived in both places, I can tell you the answer is no. The cost of milk when I lived in Michigan was much cheaper than I had to pay after reaching Colorado.

Shouldn’t our state and local governments be able to determine what a livable wage is for each locality? Even within Colorado, the cost of a home is radically different between Denver and Fairplay. How can 435 people in the House of Representatives, 434 of whom have never lived near Bailey, determine what our local business owners should be paying their employees?

These are questions you should be thinking of next year as you consider whether you want a large group of bureaucrats using larger sums of your tax dollars determining what you and your neighbors should be doing, or are you comfortable with a smaller, local government of people you rub shoulders with making more local decisions and spending fewer dollars?

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.