Government will ultimately benefit
Re “Workers welcome raises, but customers pay more” (Insight, Jan. 25): While I’m sure we would all like to see workers earn a living wage, ordering such by government mandate is disingenuous. Our legislators rail at the trickle-down theory in cutting taxes for corporations and wealthy individuals to spur the economy, but the same theory is convenient when championing the minimum wage debate.
The rise in the minimum wage will burden businesses and lead to layoffs and reduced hours, while causing business prices to rise, which will also negatively affect those who may benefit from a pay increase.
However, and not to be trumpeted during the discussion, the ultimate beneficiary will be government, which will reap the tax revenue rewards from payroll taxes, unemployment taxes, sales taxes, etc., that follow all wage and price increases. It’s the elephant in the room, and its insatiable appetite will not be denied.
Mark Roberts, Loomis
Vicious cycle on wage increases
There is no such thing as a minimum wage that is sustainable as a living wage. Labor is the largest cost of doing business. When minimum wages are rapidly increased, all wages increase whether you have minimum wage employees or not. That also includes salaried workers.
While this is happening, all goods and services increase. Then people making minimum wage find that they are right back where they started. It is a vicious cycle that can be stopped only with education and or training for better jobs.
John Hightower, Orangevale
UC needs cap on nonresidents
Re “Bill would cap UC nonresident total” (Capitol & California, Jan. 27): It’s really important that we put a cap on the number of nonresidents in the UC system. As a high school senior waiting to hear back from colleges, it’s worrisome to think that UC is increasing the amount of nonresidents over residents just because they pay more. I want to be able to go to school in my own state, not be beat out by the highest bidder.
Tymeri Asada, Sacramento
The UC is in California, right?
The University of California’s trend of continuously placing more value on generating revenue from out-of-state and international students than that of the students from the state remains to be a preposterous and counter-intuitive plan.
By effectively funneling out local students merely for greater revenue, the UC is thwarting its ability to educate Californians. Why leave those in your own state behind?
Samuel Brocchini, Sacramento
City should release report on Warren
Re “Legal bill nearly $50,000 for Warren investigation” (Local, Jan. 24): Sexual harassment training is decades old, yet the public is told to not worry our pretty little heads about the investigation of City Councilman Allen Warren. As a Woodlake voter in Warren’s district, I want to know what was discovered when the city spent 50,000 of our tax dollars.
Michelle Hewus, Sacramento
Only in Trump’s narcissistic world
Re “Trump: ‘I could ... shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters’ ” (Sacbee.com, Jan. 23): By the time I was finished reading this article, I was both shocked and literally laughing out loud. Trump is so narcissistic and blind that he actually thinks he won’t lose voters after shooting someone. Hah!
When will Trump realize that the world doesn’t revolve around him?
Grecia Huang, Sacramento
Dead people do vote in Chicago
Re “The dead people of America really don’t want Hillary Clinton to be president” (Insight, Jan. 25): Interesting idea that folks are using their obituaries as bumper stickers. But anyone from Chicago will tell you that dead people always vote Democratic.
John Kwasnik, Sacramento
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.