Opinion » Letters

Home is where you can't afford it

1 comment

Laura Mordaunt ("Re-elect Supervisor Compton, supporting all county citizens," Jan. 11) asks, "Why does everyone have to live here instead of understanding that we all have choices based on reality?" Ms. Mordaunt, shouldn't we make it possible for the low-wage workers we depend on to wait and bus tables, clean hotel rooms, staff retail counters, push fast food, bag groceries, clean people's homes, tend people's landscaping, empty bedpans, etc., to live in the town where they work?

Or is that a privilege reserved for the people they serve? Should a worker earning a low wage have the additional cost of a commute, with the cost of gas and automobile repair, along with time lost that could be spent on friends, family, or leisure pursuits? Or perhaps we should simply start paying them enough to buy a home—or would that cut too deeply into the company budget?

There is no "redistribution" of wealth. There is distribution of wealth: Every enterprise, thanks to the work of every single employee, generates a certain amount of earnings, and those earnings can be distributed in a number of ways. In the USA today, the disparity between the highest and lowest salaries is far, far greater than in any other industrialized democracy. This means that those other countries are making different decisions on how to distribute wealth. And—surprise, surprise—rates of poverty, homelessness, and poor health outcomes are much lower in those countries. Get the connection?

Johanna Rubba

Grover Beach


Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

 

Add a comment