Have we abandoned our children?
I was reading recently the statistics on the number of children still not in school and was shocked to see that in some districts 80% of students are still expected to learn remotely.
Being a retired South Carolina educator with 31 years of service at middle school, high school and community college, this number is staggering to me.
Why are we neglecting these children and assuming it is OK to do so? Many children who are still in remote situations are from low socio-economic and rural homes.
They are the children who most desperately need to be in school. Their parents are often unable to help them adequately because they lack the technical knowledge and may have outside job responsibilities.
This is a tragedy and can be considered the highest level of neglect on our part as a state. We are stifling their opportunity for adequate advancement in life and for success in life by denying them the disciplined experiences of being in the classroom at the school with their teacher and classmates.
We must get our children into school, safely and appropriately.
SANDRA F. GRIFFIN
Protect all life in SC
State lawmakers seem to care more about their jobs and religious beliefs than they do about “protecting life,” as was stated when our governor signed the new abortion bill into law.
The law protects only birth, not life.
But when it comes to protecting life with action to support education, improve health care and provide other essential services, cutting taxes always seems more important.
When failures occur, often from underfunding, deflecting blame becomes the priority.
How sad and dangerous.
Rose Hill Lane
Hike hurts unskilled
Thank you for publishing Steve Chapman’s commentary, “The downsides of raising the nation’s minimum wage,” on Saturday. He makes some excellent points.
However, he overlooked another important one. At the proposed minimum wage, a young, unskilled person would likely not be hired and given a chance to acquire skills and experience that would warrant good wages.
The minimum wage was never intended to provide a sustaining wage.
A potential employer would be more inclined to hire an inexperienced person knowing that there was some latitude to increase pay commensurate with the acquisition of job skills.
Of course, it needs to be adjusted periodically for inflation, but certainly not doubled.
HARRIET S. LITTLE
Benefits of wage hike
Increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour could have an impact on Social Security and Medicare coffers.
For workers who are earning the mandated hourly minimum wage of $7.25, their contributions to both Social Security and Medicare would more than double.
These additional funds would not only help shore up the funds available for current Social Security and Medicare recipients but also provide additional funds going forward for when these same workers become eligible for benefits.
While these benefits are adjusted for cost-of-living increases, the wages paying for some of the benefits are not.
This exacerbates the situation where more is going out than is coming in.
This is not sustainable.
An increase in the minimum wage benefits all of us, long- and short-term. In addition to the benefits accruing to the Social Security, how many people could remove themselves from many welfare programs if they were earning a decent wage?
Colonial Chatsworth Circle
I go to the grocery store and buy a pound of sliced ham wrapped in plastic, a loaf of bread in a plastic bag, a gallon of milk in a plastic jug, a pack of napkins wrapped in plastic, a ready-made salad in a plastic container, a plastic squeeze bottle of ketchup, a plastic squeeze bottle of mustard and they will not give me a plastic bag to carry it home because the plastic bag is bad for the environment.
Bye, bye, bye
I’m comforted by the fact that op-ed columnist Kirkpatrick Sale realized Interstate 95 runs both ways.