Letters to the Editor
domini
Published Letters: 1093 Editor's Choice: 76
-
Grameen advocates non-profit microfinance
[Read the article: The difference between calves and cows]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There is a substantial body of research that shows non-profit micro-finance works. It'e the for profit micro-finance that does not work. The two things are absolutely separate, and this badly designed studies conflates them.
Non-profit microfinance already has a great trackrecord. It targets women because women are more likely to reinvest the money and use it for business. The men are more likely to be caught in corruption, or use it for themselves.
WHy is it one moonbat study gets all of the attention, when there are pounds in any academic database that are opposite?
-
Meritocracy
[Read the article: Salon Interview: Camille Paglia]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is not a meritocracy. In a meritocracy there would be no legacy entrances, no nepotism, no networking to get jobs, etc. Only the most qualified would ever get the job, not the most connected. All I have to say is "Chicago corruption trials" to point that out.
After Enron et al with their concommittant tales of nepotism, no one should think "meritocracy" about Fortune 500 businesses. Family businesses priviledge family members. Ford Motor Co? Was the last Ford family member a good CEO? NO. No unless who your family is makes you "qualified".
Harvard takes ability to pay into consideration for entrance, as does other Ivy Leagues. Just look at Congress. Do we really want to say that bunch of fools were the best qualified? If they were, why would they need gerrymandering to protect them?
From the people claiming they will only vote for or hire people of their own religion for jobs to the article about people with lower grades getting jobs over people with better grades (and some employers throwing out A student resumes because they thought A students were narrow or not critical thinkers) there's a massive amount of evidence that this country is no-where near a meritocracy. We don't HAVE enough jobs to be a meritocracy.
-
Constrict the list od crimes
[Read the article: No punishment too severe?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]By the way, in some areas, you can find out if murderers are moving in. And the local police here go door to door to tell you when that happens. Wisconsin has an offender database where you can put in names or area codes and you get back records, etc. I know several other states have their criminal records online as well. I would not prefer a murderer to a sex offender. Level 3 sex offenders can escalate to murder. Someone who committed murder while drug and/or alcohol addicted, or unmedicated for mental illness, is much less likely to re-offend. The issue is re-offending. Sex issues + mental illnes are incredibly hard to deal with. Having lived in an inner city neighborhood, I'll take murderers, druggies, and robbers over sex offenders any day of the week.
"Romeo and Juliet" clauses limit statuatory rape to 4 to five year differences. They limit the "stupid 19 year old versus 17 year old" thing. There are other ways to limit that as well. I have no problem constricting the databases to violent sexual convictions (here, certain classes of felonies) only. SOme people have no remorse and can not be rehabilitated. For that small population, life sentences are probably appropriate.
Plea bargaining is what leads to lower level crimes on the sex offender database. They were originally charged higher up the food chain. Forcing some cases to trial and better representation would stop that. If the accused are too embarrassed to exercise good judgement, the problem isn't the system.
Level three offenders are violent predators who are a clear threat. There are a class of serious felonies here that life sentences would make since for. Certain classes of murders (those with particularly vicious elements) should also get life sentences. SOme people are sociopaths and can not be cured. I would rather have them behind bars than preying on other people.
-
Could people get back to the hijab issue?
[Read the article: When are women like "uncovered meat"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The "atheists versus believers" thing is getting repetitive and boring.
The issues around the symbolism, assimiliation, etc affect people right now.
-
Ed evidently isn't very bright
[Read the article: Salon Interview: Camille Paglia]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He argues the US is a meritocracy. When confronted with evidence he claims I'm "whining" and "that's life". Meritocracy means based on merit, qualificatins, and credentials. In American, you can be the most qualified, and still not get the jobs. "That's life" does not refute that. Networking to get jobs undermines meritocracy, as does nepotism, legacy appointments and admissions, etc. The US is not a meritocracy.
The 4% unemployment rate excludes those no longer actively looking and the underemployed. In some geographic areas, you have a 20- 25% unemployment rate, versus 4% in other areas. That's the reason people are dubious about the economy despite "good numbers".
The Ford Co just got rid of the family member CEO, whose family still owns swing shares of stock, leading to a fairly decent number of articles about why nepotism is really bad for business.