Letters to the Editor
JimLosAltos
Published Letters: 47 Editor's Choice: 3
-
Zero Emissions? Pahleasse.
[Read the article: The car of the future is here]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thank you for at least admitting there is some pollution from plug-in hybrds; I'm tired of reading about zero-tail-pipe pollution nonsense. The tail pipe of a plug-in is the smokestack of a coal power plant.
Still, the claim of 30% improvement over conventional internal combustion engines strikes me as questionable.
Ask anyone who lives near a coal-power plant's foul pollution-bellowing smokestack if that is preferable to a car's tailpipe following a catalytic converter.
Aside from the hype:
1. What is the impact of building enough particulate-spewing coal plants to power a meaningful number of cars, say 100 million plug-in's? How much asthma would that cause? Emphysema? Do you think carbon is the only pollutant? How many plants need to be built to power 100 million cars? 300 million cars? Where are you going to build all of them? (not next to me, I hope) This isn't about having one prototype for Ed Bagley Jr's garage.
2. What is the environmental impact of disposing of say, 100 million cars with 200 pounds each of lithium-ion batteries, some of the more toxic materials in use? (Oh, I forgot, only global warming is trendy; other pollution doesn't matter any more.)
3. Who is going to manufacture these batteries? China? Can you say Minamata-times-one-million? Sure, you can.
Plug-in hybrids could have an incremental role, but this strikes me as being like the bottled water hyperbole -- much ado about marginal impact.
-
Obama's NOT Universal Health Care
[Read the article: The qualms before the storm]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Good edit by Krugman in today's NYT on Obama v.s Clinton Health care. In short: Obama's will PREVENT universal health care while costing nearly as much. My take: It was stunning to hear Obama state in the 1:1 debate that he will FINE uninsured people for getting health care (I know; I wouldn't believe me either. Ck it out. He said it) Obama was criticized because under his plan people would be incentivized to NOT get insurance (no mandate + no pre-existing conditions = free care without insurance) so he actually patched his plan by saying he'd fine uninsured people. That's right, he criticizes Clinton for mandates and when the math in his plan doesn't work out, patches it with fines. At that point I realized he has no plan other than what his pollsters created (Obama reportedly has more pollsters than all other candidates combined). And the gaff got zero press coverage other than Krugman. Amazing. P.S. Then he ran commercials in California that mimic the insurance industry's attack ads on Clinton -- where Obama attacks universal health care. (Honest. Watch them. "I'm Obama and I approve this attack ad.)
-
Are Fines Free Market?
[Read the article: The economics of Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama stated he would FINE uninsured people that made health claims (I know; it's hard to believe. Listen to the debate, or read Krugman's NYT editorial). is that free market? Obama doesn't have policies he has speeches crafted by the largest group of pollsters in the campaign.
-
Supporting Obama, Based on What?
[Read the article: What I really wanted to say to Chris Matthews]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You're certainly correct that there are several other qualified women. But you're wrong that Obama is qualified IMHO. As Gloria Steinam wrote in the NYT, "If a woman had a resume as thin as Obama's she wouldn't be qualified for the Senate let alone to be a presidential candidate." (I did that from memory so it may not be exactly right.) If Obama was a hybrid his zero-footprint would be a positive; as a politician voting "present" 129 times and having never sponsored a major bill in the U.S. Senate makes him a hollow suit. We've already selected a President because, "He's a regular guy. I could have a drink with him. " We don't need to follow by selecting the successor because of his mellifluous baritone, smile and vague phrases. You think Obama is " a change agent", check out: His Karl-Rove-esq attack campaign AGAINST universal health care; his $1 Trillion social security tax hike (OK, so he just didn't know what he is saying and doesn't truly want to increase taxes by $1,000,000,000,000 a year (did I get all 12 zeros in?) but isn't that the point?). What we need now -- in the wake of Katrina, the deficits, and the AG fiascos -- is simply someone competent. Taking risks on vacuous visionaries can be worthwhile, but too much is screwed up now to roll the dice.
-
Oh, Please
[Read the article: Hillary's time of troubles]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Can't we get some real reporting and not this transparent cheerleading? This article is embarrassing, something that would better fit with the flamers in the comments/letters. Obama continues to win in small states, particularly those that have caucuses. Clintion, however, has won all the major states the Dems must win in November: California, New York, Florida, New Jersey, Michigan, and she's ahead in polls for Texas and Ohio. Overall, the delegate count per NYTimes shows Clinton with the slimmest of leads in committed delegates. Other estimates are about even.
-
Your Thin Obsession is Unhealthy
[Read the article: Spain: Goodbye stick-figure sizing]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Will all resect, your repeated claims that being "too thin" is unhealthy don't stand up; it's bad science. . Salon columns have claimed (as I recall) that anyone with a BMI of below 18.5 is "unhealthy" and "an example of bad health of young" women. In fact, a large number of professional, women athletes are thus in poor health and poor examples, according to your standards, including tennis star Maria Sharapova, Olympic gold medalist Amanda Beard, professional golfer Michelle Wie --- all of whom have BMIs that are LOWER than supermodel Gisele Bundchen's.
IMHO: http://www.fawcette.net/2007/12/why-tennis-shar.html
Medical researchers actually claim that for people to achieve their maximum potential lifespan approaching 130 years, the key, in fact the only positive factor they can confirm, is to consume 30% fewer calories than is normally recommended and primarily eat salads until you're skin and bones -- sort of like a model .
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=1809903&affil=kgo