Republican leaders are willing to allow the first minimum wage increase in a decade but only if it's coupled with a cut in inheritance taxes on multimillion-dollar estates, congressional aides said Friday.
- GOP makes conditions on wage increase
Perhaps the members of the GOP who wish to couple these two issues should more carefully consider the differences in needs between someone who lives on a salary of $10,712 per year (5.15 * 40 * 52) versus someone who has a multimillion-dollar estate. Or, perhaps said representatives should be required to give back the more than $30,000 “cost of living increases” on their salaries since the last time minimum wage was increased. Or, perhaps said representatives could just come right out and say, “we are trying to kill this bill for political reasons by making it unpalatable to everyone except those with multi-million dollar estates who also work at a minimum wage job.”
Even if we put the particulars of this situation aside, rider bills remain one of the most ridiculous concepts I’ve ever heard of. It’s essentially the same as if I want to buy a pencil, because I need one to write the next Great American Novel. However, before I can purchase my pencil, a strange man informs me that I can only buy said pencil if I also purchase a small pet penguin. I don’t really like this idea… but hey, really, what’s the extra cost of a penguin to me. Anyway, I really need the pencil to write my novel, so though I don’t want the penguin for any other reason, I’ll buy it as well just so I can get my pencil.
This isn’t the end of it, though. As I walk to the check-out with my pencil in one hand and my small pet penguin in the other, another man walks up to me and informs me that in order to complete my purchase, I’ll also have to buy furry green shoes, a taco stand in Alaska, and a bright red Hummer (which, not being a male with impotence issues, I don’t really need). Additionally, after making my purchase, I’ll have to steal candy from a homeless blind child. At this point, I have two options. I can steal the candy and spend obscene amounts of money to purchase a bunch of stuff that I don’t want, just so that I can get the one useful item out of the bunch. Or, I can give up, and leave the store sans pencil, as I don’t have the money or the moral stomach to complete the purchase.
I’d probably just abandon the entire venture (as I’m assuming that those who supported the original bill will also do). After all, I don’t want a small pet penguin, furry green shoes, a taco stand in Alaska, a bright red Hummer, and a clearly un-nice task... I just want my darn pencil!
Doesn’t it seem logical to vote on just one pencil at a time?
