Sanders’ economic policy falls flat

Kudos to Robert Fellner for his commentary describing the issue of income inequality, as well as the pay discrepancy enjoyed by government employees over the poor people of the private sector (“Sanders blind to key source of income inequality,” Feb. 2 Review-Journal). Sen. Bernie Sanders uses the argument of income inequality as a foundation of his campaign for democratic socialism. He plans to soak the rich and the evil people on Wall Street. I am not rich, but as a small investor in Wall Street, I have to assume I will be subjected to the ominous “speculation tax” Mr. Sanders threatens.

Nevada has placed first nationally with a 50 percent gap between government employee wages and those of the lowly private sector, and the retirement benefits have a much wider gap. There may not be a cure for the government employee-private sector wage difference, unless we can pass constitutional laws forbidding government employee unions. Those unions exert heavy influence on politicians at all levels, ensuring government employees keep getting more pay and better benefits. Perhaps we can hope for politicians who would stand up to the unions and at least hold the line until the private sector catches up.

Sen. Sanders, as an avowed socialist, would like to see the U.S. embrace democratic socialism. We should note that socialism has failed, or is failing, everywhere it has been tried. The late Margaret Thatcher had it right in saying, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Mr. Sanders is very popular with young voters. They certainly have reason to be down on capitalism, which has not treated them well since the start of the Great Recession. I hope they will eventually come to embrace capitalism as the best system devised by man that does well for all ranks of people. As the saying goes, “If you are young and not liberal, you have no heart, but if you are older and are not conservative, you have no brain.”

Richard N. Fulton

Henderson

CCSD teacher retention

I am always entertained by the news of teacher shortages in the Clark County School District. I taught in for the district for 16 years, retiring a few years ago. I was never asked why I was retiring, nor was I asked what could be done to make me stay.

I was a highly qualified teacher with a Master’s degree in my subject area. In the past, while working for large and small companies, I was always asked to meet with the human resources department before my last day. Why does the CCSD human resources department not contact those teachers who leave and use that information to assist in the retention of teachers?

My son taught for the school district for three years, then asked to transfer to another school. He was told his administrator would not support the transfer, and his response was to leave the district. Again, the district’s HR department did not contact him to ask about his departure.

Maybe the district doesn’t want to know why teachers leave, but it seems to me such information would be useful.

Susan Young

Henderson