In my most recent Op-Ed, my object was to justify how not everyone can stand up for every issue. However, it is obvious that more humanistic issues are easier to sympathize with.

 

For example, the difference between climate change and poverty. I would argue that poverty is something that more people see as problematic.

 

It seems that I can see poverty as an issue. It is always troubling to see impoverished people in society. The worry may come in when I consider that I could struggle with poverty someday.

 

The Fight for $15 is a movement, in short, to raise the minimum wage for people working in the fast-food industry.

 

According to a New York Times video by Samantha Stark, “Organizers behind fast-food workers’ calls for a $15 hourly wage have been pushing a bigger national strategy. They hope to galvanize low-wage workers under the banner of civil rights.”

 

There really are not that many arguments that I have been introduced to that convince me that raising the minimum wage is a bad idea. However, I do think that doubling the current federal minimum wage law is too much.

 

One argument that does come to mind initially is that it would eliminate jobs. Most grocery stores have self checkout lanes so as to not only avoid human to human contact, but to save the owners of these grocery stores money.

 

Thus the end of this argument is really that unemployment would initially be on the rise.

 

According to a Washington Post article, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that President Barrack Obama’s proposed $10.10 wage, once fully implemented, would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers.

 

And yes, that is a lot of people but not in proportion to the entire United States.

 

Politics That are Personal

 

My understanding of “money” is not generally problematic. I do fear my financial stability, once I graduate from the institutionalization of my 17 year education.

 

Taking a stance on a particular political issue is generally a pretty personal act. That is, that to act, it has to affect you personally.

 

The issue of poverty is much deeper than just fast-food workers and their financial struggle.  One aspect that makes the minimum wage debacle troublesome is that it deals heavily with race.

 

I was evident in Stark’s New York Times video that many of the individuals who struggle to make ends meet are black.

 

My concern is whether or not we merely take stances behind issues that directly affect us? Do we only stand against problems because they are our problems? Can we take a stance because the problem is effecting another human demographic?

 

I think a big part of the conversation pertains to the rhetorical strategies backing the argument. It seems that if a political argument is grounded in pathos I am normally pretty taken.

 

The issue I want to bring to the table today does not have a very strong effect on me. I think that is why I want to bring it up.

 

And so it seems that I want to go back on myself and claim something a little bit different than my last opinion piece.

 

The necessity of a political issue hitting close to home in order for advocacy to be a response makes sense to me. Nonetheless, the issue at hand, whatever it may be does not have to directly affect you. We are human beings and sometimes, maybe we should just stand up for each other.