Work Ethic, Unemployment Benefits, and Retirement

Current United States Employment Situation

The official United States unemployment rate[1] of 3.7% in June 2019 is only 0.1% higher than the April and May rates of 3.6%, which were the lowest since 3.5% in December 1969. Official measures indicate that jobs are available for persons willing to work who match employers’ needs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics[2] reported on July 9^th, 2019 that “job openings” were “7.3 million on the last day of May.”

This seems great for workers. But, some other news for workers is not good. Many persons work at part-time jobs or jobs with relatively low pay compared to factory jobs in past decades. Often employees work two jobs or in some cases three jobs to keep bills paid.

The United States minimum wage[3] which is current $7.25 has not been raised since 2009. I already wrote supporting raising the minimum wage,[4] and I also support improving the overall treatment of workers.

But, workers need to be willing to work, to be dependable, to avoid abusing drugs, etc. This article focuses on being willing to seek work, since it seems to me that far too many people are not taking active steps to enter the labor force. And, those not actively seeking work are typically not included in the unemployment rate.   

Working and Benefit Programs

Whenever possible, I feel honest persons would prefer to be working at a job that helps others, instead of being idle. However, unemployment benefits can be a wonderful blessing. They help persons temporarily out of work meet basic living expenses.

Similarly, different programs benefit the elderly, disabled, caregivers of preschool children, and others who are unable for various reasons to work at an income-producing job.

But, unemployment benefits (and benefits from other programs) are not designed to let able-bodied persons sit idly at home drawing a government check instead of performing some useful service. Unemployed persons can devote time to seeking a job, doing volunteer work for a church or other organization, and taking constructive actions to develop skills in whatever way is reasonably available.

If you suffer from depression or some other problem, get help. Need job skills? Job training programs are available. Also, if your geographical area lacks job opportunities, please consider relocating.

I believe persons typically live happier, healthier, and longer if they are productive, doing something that benefits themselves and others. If you doubt my belief, check online and you can find numerous articles about scientific studies that indicate the same thing.

I encourage persons drawing unemployment benefits not to wait for their benefits to run out. Instead, search for jobs, do volunteer work, read informative books and other literature to better oneself, etc.

My Personal Experience

I’ve been blessed to always either have a job or to have friends and family who voluntarily helped me out, in addition to access to other resources that enabled me to get by without ever seeking or accepting unemployment benefits. I am grateful for that help and hope it freed up funds to help others who needed unemployment benefits more.

By the way, I don’t want the unemployed to be forced to take any available job. For example, due to my personal beliefs, I would not want to work in a liquor store selling alcoholic beverages. As basically a pacifist, I wouldn’t even desire to work in a military job, though I commend the numerous soldiers who serve faithfully: establishing peace, keeping the peace, doing good humanitarian work following natural disasters, etc.

My Recommendations

Though I don’t urge persons to take any available job, I do urge the unemployed to seek to find a job. Seek to “find a need and fill it,” to quote words credited to Ruth Stafford Peale, wife of Norman Vincent Peale.

Folks, please use unemployment benefits wisely, and only when necessary. Private companies and the government do not have unlimited resources. The resources expended on unnecessary unemployment benefits could be used for something else, maybe even pay raises for workers.

The System Has Weaknesses

By the way, one of the saddest things about unemployment benefits is that many of the people who in theory might need them most are ineligible due to not working enough hours per week at a job prior to becoming unemployed, not working long enough at a company, being self employed, etc. Furthermore, some employers seem to seek to avoid paying unemployment benefits by extensively relying on temporary employees, part-time employees, etc. Abuse of unemployment benefits is a problem among both employees and employers.

The system definitely isn’t perfect. The people who have been actively but unsuccessfully seeking work, struggling to get unemployment benefits, and meeting numerous obstacles and major financial difficulties know that better than I do.

Despite this, I am very thankful that we have a system—and that it is probably much better than whatever system existed centuries ago. Please don’t abuse it. If you are drawing unemployment benefits and are able to work, please actively seek work—and don't just “go through the motions.” Perhaps try doing it like it's a full-time job that requires a lot of effort. After all, in a sense it is, as numerous writers of articles and books on searching for a job point out, and as many unemployed people find out.

Retirement/Closing Thoughts

Even after retirement, the happiest and healthiest people seem to be those who remain active doing volunteer work or performing some other useful function. What I call a “Christian work ethic” leads a person to be happily doing something beneficial until God calls him or her home.

I hope I will always be willing and able to do useful work as long as I live—and enjoy doing it. It is a blessing to be doing labor I enjoy that benefits others as well as myself. I am truly blessed to be doing a job I love (writing) and over the years have enjoyed a variety of nice second jobs to help keep the monetary bills paid. I hope you are all similarly blessed with productive, enjoyable jobs!

ENDNOTES:

---

[1] “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey”; United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (monthly unemployment rate January 1948-June 2019); data extracted on July 21, 2019; website accessed on July 21, 2019; https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

[2] “Job Openings and Labor Turnover Summary”; United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics; “For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT) Tuesday, July 9, 2019”; website accessed July 21, 2019; https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm

[3] “Minimum Wage”; United States Department of Labor; website accessed July 21, 2019; https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/minimumwage

[4] James Edwin Gibson; “Raise the Minimum Wage in the United States? Yes”; Google Blogger; October 9, 2008; website accessed July 21, 2019; https://oneopinionsomeviews.blogspot.com/2018/10/raise-minimum-wage-in-united-states-yes.html?m=0

(The author has also written other articles supporting raising the minimum wage.)

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on July 24, 2019 is virtually identical to one submitted to Craft News Report, a website operated by the author's friend Paul Craft, on July 21, 2019. That article was adapted from a chapter in the author’s book True Christianity: It May Not Be What You Think. The author has also written similar information for other sources in the past.

Is Obamacare Affordable and Legal?

Officially named the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act[1], the health care reform bill signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2010 created many changes in health care coverage in the United States.

Its title is often shortened to just the Affordable Health Care Act. It is also often referred to as Obamacare. Some call it “the unaffordable health care act.”

The law required all persons to acquire health insurance and imposed a financial penalty on persons who did not.

Change to an Obamacare Requirement and a Lawsuit

A tax cut bill passed by Congress in 2017 eliminated the financial penalty to individuals for not purchasing insurance effective this year (2019), so under current laws persons filing income taxes next year for 2019 will not need to pay the penalty if they lack health care coverage.

A 2018 lawsuit claimed that eliminating this financial penalty made the whole law unconstitutional.  In December 2018 a U.S. District Court judge in Texas agreed. The case was appealed.

On Tuesday (July 9, 2019) a federal appeals court panel in New Orleans heard oral arguments in the case. This has been reported by various news sources, including the New York Times[2], Reuters[3], Politico[4], CNN[5], NPR[6], and the Associated Press[7].

Whatever this appeals court eventually decides, the case will likely be appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

How the United States Supreme Court ultimately rules on this case, perhaps next year (2020), will have major implications for health care.

Ideally, it would be great if the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, the Republican-controlled Senate, and President Trump could reach agreement on health care reforms that retain the good parts of Obamacare while either eliminating or improving the bad parts. But, given deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans on the issue, this seems unlikely to me.

Perhaps the Biggest Problem With the ACA

Perhaps the biggest problem with the “Affordable Health Care Act” (ACA) is that it made health care coverage more expensive for most persons. Much more expensive for millions.

Even with partial subsidies, many persons experienced more expensive coverage than before the ACA. And, due to deductibles, many of those who purchased insurance felt they couldn’t afford to use it.

One reason for the cost increase is the need for extra money to pay for coverage for pre-existing conditions, many of which are preventable. Under the old system prior to the ACA:

·         insurance companies often excluded coverage for preexisting conditions,

·         insurance companies cancelled coverage when it came up for renewal if expensive health problems developed,

·         and/or a person experiencing significant health care problems lost health coverage due to losing their job because of health issues that prevented them from working at their job.

Churches and others sometimes helped persons facing huge medical bills under the old system, but many persons suffered from lack of coverage. The old insurance system offered relatively cheap coverage for most persons, partially by not covering the relatively few who cost the most to insure.

Arguably, most persons are worse off now under Obamacare, but the millions of persons who benefit from it would hate to lose their Obamacare coverage. 

The Solution?

What is the solution? As I wrote in a March Google Blogger post[8], the greatest need in this country regarding health care is better preventive care, since most health care problems and costs are preventable.

If we take action to prevent most preventable health care problems, we can provide quality coverage to virtually everyone significantly cheaper than we do now.

But, getting persons to avoid abusing legal and illegal drugs, to exercise regularly, to eat a proper diet, etc., is easier written than attained. Still, making significant progress in this may be easier than getting Republicans and Democrats to come together on a quality compromise bill that fixes Obamacare’s weaknesses.

I hope and pray that somehow constructive changes occur before next year when the United States Supreme Court will likely make a decision in this court case. Far too often, our court system seems led (or forced?) to do things as a result of what I consider inappropriate actions by our legislative and executive branches.

ENDNOTES:                

---

[1] “Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act”; HealthCare.gov; website accessed July 10, 2019; https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/patient-protection-and-affordable-care-act/

[2] Abby Goodnough; “Appeals Court Seems Skeptical About Constitutionality of Obamacare Mandate”; New York Times; July 9, 2019; website accessed July 10, 2019; https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/health/obamacare-appeals-court.html

[3] Nate Raymond; “U.S. appeals court signals sympathy to bid to strike down Obamacare”; Reuters; July 9, 2019; https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-obamacare/u-s-appeals-court-to-take-up-constitutionality-of-obamacare-idUSKCN1U40ZU

[4] Paul Demko; “Appeals court skeptical Obamacare can survive”; Politico; July 9, 2019; website accessed July 10, 2019; https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/09/obamacare-lawsuit-1404171

[5] Tami Luhby, Dan Berman, and Joan Biskupic; “Republican-appointed judges appear to side with Texas challenge to Obamacare”; CNN; July 9, 2019; website accessed July 10, 2019; https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/09/politics/obamacare-appeal-arguments-texas-california/index.html

[6] Julie Rovner; “The Affordable Health Care Act Is Back in Court”; 5 Facts You Need to Know”; July 9, 2019; website accessed July 10, 2019; https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/07/09/739653482/the-affordable-care-act-is-back-in-court-5-facts-you-need-to-know

[7] Kevin McGill and Rebecca Santana; “Validity of Obama health care law at issue in appeal hearing”; AP News; July 9, 2019; website accessed July 10, 2019; https://www.apnews.com/a3b83b51e2f74699b8fd6c480d953daa

[8] James Edwin Gibson; “True Health Care Reform: Better Preventive Care”; Google Blogger; March 30, 2019; webpage accessed July 11, 2019; https://oneopinionsomeviews.blogspot.com/2019/03/true-health-care-reform-better.html

NOTE:

This article submitted to Google Blogger on July 11, 2019 is virtually identical to one the author submitted to another website, Craft News Report which is operated by his friend Paul Craft, on July 10, 2019. 

Save Time: Eliminate Twice a Year Time Changes

Let’s save time by not changing our clocks twice a year. It takes time to change clocks forward one hour in the spring and backward one hour in the autumn. It’s also confusing and can result in persons being early or late for appointments due to not making the change correctly.

Numerous persons in recent years have been seeking to end the practice of changing the time twice a year. A March 2019 National Geographic piece[1] discusses some of these efforts.

In my home state of Kentucky, on Monday, July 2, 2019, two Kentucky state representatives prefiled a bill to establish Daylight Saving Time year round in Kentucky if the federal government allows it, according several news sources, including  the Louisville Courier-Journal[2] and WLKY[3].

Over four years later in November 2023, debate over eliminating the twice a year time changes continues in Kentucky and elsewhere across the country. Studies seem to indicate that staying on standard time all year round would be best for our health as humans, as mentioned in a March 11, 2023, NPR article citing support for this from "many doctors and scientists." {4] Other media sources also report this.

Daylight Saving Time Exemptions, Benefits, and Current Law

A Transportation.gov piece[5] notes that The Uniform Time Act allows states to exempt themselves from Daylight Saving Time and stay on Standard Time all year round. The article also lists supposed benefits of Daylight Saving Time.

Some believe that under Daylight Saving Time certain times of the year people will be awake and active more during daylight hours, and not out and about as much during hours of darkness, which improves safety and reduces energy consumption due to using artificial lights. There is some debate on how effective that it is, but it apparently helps some. However, I feel that any benefits are more than offset by the disadvantages of adjusting clocks and sleep schedules twice a year, as well as the health risks mentioned earlier.

While states can exempt themselves from Daylight Saving Time, they cannot exempt themselves from Standard Time without a change in federal law. In other words, a state can stay all year round on the “slow” time of early November to midMarch via changing state laws. But, if a state wants to stay on the “fast” time of midMarch to early November all year round, it would require Congressional approval, or a Supreme Court ruling that the law was invalid.

I support going to Standard Time all year long. Changing to this can happen at a state level, and seems to be better for our health, as mentioned earlier. But, rather than states have an assortment of laws that would be confusing to persons, I support a law being passed by Congress to make Standard Time permanent nationwide.  

Time change is regulated by The Uniform Time Act of 1966,[6] which was modified in the 1980s and then again by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 [7] which took effect in 2007 and sets the current dates for the time change.

Under current United States law most places in the country change their time ahead one hour at 2:00 a.m. (changing the time to 3:00 a.m.) on the second Sunday in March. Then, on the first Sunday in November at 2:00 a.m., the time is moved back one hour (changing the time to 1:00 a.m.).

Time Changing on My Devices and Closing Thoughts

My cell phones and computer automatically change time appropriately. But, I still need to change the time on my battery-powered alarm clocks, my am-fm clock radio, and my am-fm CD player. It takes time to change the time on all these devices. I want to save that time. More important, I want to avoid the confusion of the time changes and the effects of altering my bedtime twice a year. Below is a picture of two of my battery-powered alarm clocks; I moved them to a convenient location to photograph.

A website Petitition2Congress.com[8] provides a form to contact the President, your United States Senators, and your Congressperson seeking action to end the practice of changing time twice a year. But, I think it’s better to e-mail, phone, or mail via the U.S. Postal Service a personal message to those individuals directly rather than sending a form letter.

Either permanent Daylight Saving Time or permanent Standard Time would be great with me. However, since Standard Time is the more standard version and supported more by health experts, I advocate permanent Standard Time. Maybe we can fall back one hour this fall to Standard Time, then stay on it. And of course, regardless of the time we're on, there are fewer hours of daylight in winter in the United States.

Many countries do not change time twice a year. However, adding to the confusion, those that do change time do not all adjust time on the same two dates of the year.

Momentum seems to be increasing toward ending this time-change practice in the United States and in other countries around the world.

If a huge number of persons urge Congress to act, I think change can come as soon as this year here in the United States. Let’s take action. I e-mailed my United States Senators and Congressperson about this issue. Will you contact yours, too, on this issue?

ENDNOTES:     

---

[1] Maya Wei-Haas; “Tired of daylight saving time? These places are trying to end it”; National Geographic; March 8, 2019; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/03/tired-of-daylight-saving-time-these-states-trying-to-end-clock-changes/

[2] Lucas Aulbach; “Tired of changing the clock? Kentucky lawmakers propose sticking with daylight saving time”; Courier-Journal; July 2, 2019; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/02/kentucky-daylight-saving-time-bill-prefiled/1625917001/

[3] WLKY Digital Team; “Kentucky lawmakers file bill to make daylight saving time permanent”; WLKY; July 1, 2019; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.wlky.com/article/kentucky-lawmakers-file-bill-to-make-daylight-saving-time-permanent/28253027

[4] Aubrey, Allison; "Changing our clocks is a health hazard. Just ask a sleep doctor"; NPR; March 11, 2023, 7:01 a.m. ET; webpage accessed March 13, 2023; https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/11/1162345477/changing-our-clocks-is-a-health-hazard-just-ask-a-sleep-doctor#:~:text=Many%20doctors%20and%20scientists%20agree,time%2C%20which%20preserves%20morning%20light.

[5] “Daylight Saving Time”; Transportation.gov; updated March 10, 2014; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/daylight-saving-time

[6] “Public Law 89-387: An Act to promote the observance of a uniform system of time throughout the United States”; April 13, 1966; website accessed July 6, 2019 and again February 5, 2023 ; https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-80/pdf/STATUTE-80-Pg107.pdf

[7] "Daylight Saving Time Rules"; National Institute of Standards and Techonology; March 2, 2010; last revised March 7, 2022; webpage accessed February 5, 2023; https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/popular-links/daylight-saving-time-dst (Numerous other articles also discuss the Energy Policy Act of 2005.)

[8] “END DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME”; Petition2Congress; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.petition2congress.com/ctas/end-daylight-savings-time

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on July 9, 2019 is virtually identical to one the author submitted to another website (Craft News Report, operated by his friend Paul Craft) a few days earlier.

This Google Blogger article was last revised on November 4, 2023.

Is the United States Its Most Divided Since the Civil War?

The United States may be its most divided since the Civil War.

Abortion

Millions of persons, including me, consider abortion murder and adamantly oppose abortion under most circumstances. When a Supreme Court vacancy occurred late in President Barack Obama’s administration, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell led a successful move to delay the replacement until after the election when President Donald Trump could nominate a conservative justice more likely to be pro-life.

Now with the prospect of a conservative Supreme Court for the foreseeable future, some Democratic Presidential candidates advocate expanding the Supreme Court[1] to more than nine justices, as a way to put liberals in control.

Gay Marriage

Marriage between homosexuals is another polarizing issue. With its legalization, many conservative Christians are outraged. And, many liberals seek even more rights for homosexuals.

Health Care

An increasing number of persons advocate a single-payer health care system that offers coverage for everyone. On the other hand, many criticize government-run health care.

Escalating Conflict

The conflict between conservatives and liberals on abortion, gay marriage, health care, and other issues seems to be escalating. Instead of seeking to find the best solution or common ground, the arguments seem to be getting worse. Each side seems determined to have its own way.

When Barack Obama was President some persons in certain states such as Texas considered seeking for their states to withdraw from the country to form a new country. Now that Donald Trump is President, some persons in other states such as California are advocating a secession from the nation.

Where Will It End?

What will be the final result of this divisiveness? In Mathew 12:25 the Bible states “. . . Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:” (King James Version), which is a passage Abraham Lincoln apparently used as his source when he stated in a June 16, 1858 speech[2] at the Illinois Republican State Convention where he had been nominated to run for the United States Senate “. . . .A house divided against itself, cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. . . . ”

Lincoln was elected President of the United States in 1860, the Civil War followed, and Lincoln is often considered our nation’s greatest President for his role in preserving the country and eliminating slavery. But, I like to think our nation would have eventually eliminated slavery peacefully and avoided much of the divisiveness that endures to this day if an even better leader had been elected.

Here in 2019 we are not on the verge of a civil war or a secession of states. The division is not as bad as it was in the mid1800s. But, the talk of many in certain states about secession may lead to actual secession by one or more states if things continue to get worse in coming years.

Perhaps we can find leaders who will achieve a compromise that placates both sides to some extent. Better yet, as I see it, would be to succeed in educating the public about which side is correct on each issue, attaining unity. For example, on the abortion issue, I’d love for everyone to accept the sanctity of life. We could end most abortions, greatly reduce premarital and extramarital sex, improve prenatal care, and greatly increase adoptions of unwanted children by persons qualified to be good parents.

But, to succeed in resolving issues like abortion, gay marriage, and health care, we need to be willing to listen to one another respectfully and to seek the best solution for each issue.

In Kentucky where I live, the state motto is “united we stand, divided we fall.” I think those are wise words. I think these words mean we need to stand for all persons, including the unborn, and that persons desiring no children need to exercise their God-given self-control to practice sexual abstinence or to use contraceptives (maybe multiple methods) properly. But, for our society to be united, somehow this message need to be communicated more effectively than it has been so far.

Ideally, if we all listen intelligently with an open mind, we will eventually reach agreement on the right path to take on each issue, as we learn from one another. Let’s seek to do it.   

ENDNOTES:     

---

[1] “Are you open to expanding the size of the Supreme Court”; New York Times; website accessed June 30, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/supreme-court-democratic-candidates.html

(Numerous other websites also discuss this.)

[2] “Full text of ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand’ ”; Lincoln Room of the University of Illinois Library, via Archive.org; website accessed June 30, 2019. https://archive.org/stream/ahousedividedaga00linc/ahousedividedaga00linc_djvu.txt

(Numerous other websites also quote from this speech.)

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on July 2, 2019 is based upon one the author submitted to a friend's website, Craft News Report, on June 30, 2019.

Wearing High Heel Shoes: Definite Health Risks, Why Wear Them?

Some workplaces require women to wear high heel shoes. Many women dislike the requirement.

“More than 19,000 people in Japan” have signed “a petition to ban the requirement” according to a recent CNN article.[*] Numerous other news sources also have reported on this petition, which apparently continues to get signatures online.

Employers at various organizations in other countries than Japan also require high heels for female workers. I strongly feel that such requirements need to be eliminated.

Why I Oppose High Heel Shoes

I remember watching women struggle to walk in high-heeled shoes. I remember women talking about how their feet hurt at the end of the day after wearing high heels for several hours. Why should women punish themselves this way?

What is the purpose of a shoe? It seems to me that the main purposes of shoes are protecting one’s feet and making it easier to walk and stand. Low-heeled shoes seem much better suited for this.

I think high-heeled shoes seem to be uncomfortable to wear, unsafe to walk in, and inappropriate to wear while driving a car. Furthermore, over the long term they can cause several problems for your feet—assuming you don’t fall and suffer a severe accident in the short term wearing them.

I am not a medical professional and cannot give any medical advice. But if you like, you can research online and find numerous articles either written by medical professionals or that quote medical professionals, which report on the safety hazards of high-heeled shoes.

Choosing to Wear High Heels

Women enjoy the right to wear suitable shoes of their choice. But I wonder why so many choose to frequently wear high heel shoes (also called high-heeled shoes). A lot of women wear high-heeled shoes to church services (and other activities). Why does a Christian woman (or anyone) wear high heels?

Can anyone cite any medical benefit to the average person from wearing high heels? Is there any reason for the average lady to wear high heels other than fashion? Is the desire to look fashionable the big appeal? If some fashion show (whether in Paris or in your hometown) portrays specific styles as being “in” this season, will women in your neighborhood rush in droves to buy the newly fashionable shoes? Please seek to resist the temptation.

I urge women to revolt peacefully against the persons/traditions/forces that lead them to purchase and wear high-heeled shoes. Instead, buy and wear comfortable walking shoes.

Closing Thoughts

I am thankful men typically do not wear high heels. I personally have never worn them other than trying them on briefly. I hope the day will come soon when no employer finds high heels necessary for female employees. If your job requires them, you have my sympathy. I hope your employer reads this chapter and changes the requirement.

There are various theories on how high heels originated and why they became popular. You can find numerous articles online about the subject if it interests you. For my purposes here, I find it sufficient to state that I do not know of a logical reason (other than orders from an employer or someone else) for modern women to insert their feet into them at all. I certainly see no reason for ladies to wear them for hours daily while walking, working typical jobs, driving a car, or relaxing.

Indeed, I know of no good reason for buying or wearing high heel shoes unless an employer requires it (which seems discriminatory and is hopefully relatively rare here in the United States). However, I am a man. Perhaps as a member of the male gender there is something I fail to understand on this topic.

Some women who wear high-heeled shoes at least sometimes and gave me feedback on their reason(s) for wearing them seemed to basically offer three reasons for wearing high heels: (1) to satisfy a job requirement, (2) to appear taller, and/or (3) to look more attractive. I sympathize with the job issue and hope employers will change that requirement, as I stated earlier. But I respectfully feel that the other two reasons do not justify undertaking the health risks of high heels.

If you know of a good reason for wearing high-heeled shoes, please write to tell me about it and why you think it is a good reason. Thanks!

ENDNOTE:

---

[*] Wakatsuki, Yoko and Westcott, Ben; “Japanese minister: High heels for women at work are ‘occupationally necessary and appropriate’ ”; CNN; updated June 6, 2019; website accessed June 8, 2019; https://www.cnn.com/style/article/japan-minister-high-heels-intl/index.html

(Numerous other online websites also have articles about this issue.)

NOTE:

This piece is being submitted to Google Blogger on June 9, 2019. It is virtually identical to a piece the author submitted to his friend Paul Craft’s website, Craft News Report, on June 8, 2019. The Craft News Report piece was adapted and updated from a chapter in the author’s book True Christianity: It May Not Be What You Think (chapter 39 in the second and third editions, chapter 32 in the first edition). The author has also written on this issue for other websites in the past.