Letters to the Editor
Kevin C
Published Letters: 142 Editor's Choice: 23
-
@ Hewedandhammered
[Read the article: The crash in Republican economics ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks for bringing up a good example of the success of deregulation. Ok, so airlines have destroyed--shareholder--value, but adjusting for inflation you pay around 1/4 of what you did for a flight in 1978. So unless you are a flight attendant, pilot, or airline shareholder you are about 4x better off than you were under regulation.
You have more options at a lower cost and flying allows "any Joe Sixpack to jet off to Raleigh-Durham," as Sideshow Bob would say. So society as a whole benefits through increased selection and lower prices, while a subset of people suffer. Hardly a tragedy.
Not to say that financial markets don't need to be regulated--but airline regulation that told companies where to fly and how much to charge didn't work.
-
I think the headline of the post is misleading
[Read the article: FDA disregarded results on food from cloned animals]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Would it not be more intellectually honest to say "FDA disregarded survey results"? The way it reads it sounds more like they disregarded some scientific study on the safety of the products.
Just my opinion.
-
@ AlecsMom
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Enough to keep him electable in the fall and prevent the Republicans retaining the white house.
If that means he has to carry white ethnics that aren't particularly enlightened, which I think it does, well he better be able to do that, I'd think.
-
@ Xrandadu Hutman
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think if you expect Joan to do so, you should preface all your letters with "I'm in the tank for Barack Obama."
Or maybe people can have a discussion that actually accepts that there are different points of view on His Holiness.
By the way, I'm generally favorable to Clinton.
-
The trouble with the Obama campaign strategy
[Read the article: Was Obama's speech enough?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is, as pointed out elsewhere and numerous times, is that he is running as a post-partisan, post-racial candidate. The problem with that is that you get cut less slack (and rightfully so). That's why I am sick of being lectured that Clinton is destroying the Democrats by continuing to challenge Obama. Isn't it better to have something like this become a media circus now rather than being an "October Surprise?"
Look, Obama's association with Wright's church served him well in Chicago politics--just like being pro-choice and relatively pro-gay served Romney well in Massachussets. So now he denounces him when he is interfering with his goal to be President--politics as usual, but riskier when you are portraying yourself as above politics.
-
@ walter_map
[Read the article: The crash in Republican economics ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ok, so 60%--that's bad? Although 1999 data is a little dated in 2008, no?
I admit I made a mistake--the chart I used to estimate that is 1968 through 2005.
http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9283573
Since it is the Economist, I'm sure you'll pooh pooh it. If you look at the chart, though, airfares continued to stay flat through the subsequent 6 years while consumer prices continued to rise. Regardless--prices down, more people flying--how does that hurt people?
-
@ rrecrock
[Read the article: The crash in Republican economics ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ok, but air travel accounts for around 2% of greenhouse gas emissions. Unless you don't travel by car or consume goods that are shipped by truck, you are a much worse contributor to the problem. That's 19% of emissions--so if you reduce the amount of driving emissions by 10% you offset air travel emissions.
Of course it is easy to allegedly not go to Tahiti and save emissions--it is harder to trade in the SUV or not drive a fair amount for the same emissions cuts.
Additionally, it is said that flying has been ruined by becoming available to the hoi polloi instead of just the rich. I think the benefit increases to society though.
So, to sum up--deregulation hurt airline employees, shareholders, and rich people and business travellers. Tragedy.
-
Haven't we been following poor Harry Macklowe?
[Read the article: Architecture of a recession. ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is kind of a sign of froth in the market that he can't make the mortgage on the GM Building (and that he bought it for somewhere well north of $1B). Of course the commercial market is going to go through a rough patch, if not collapse.
Then again, hopefully that'll drive down some of the crazy commercial rents, companies can lock in some benefits, and smaller companies won't be forced out of the city as fast (while big ones argue for tax breaks).
It is the circle of life.
-
Haven't we heard enough about the McGreeveys?
[Read the article: Ménage à trois: The musical!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Gee whiz.
-
I was also in Orange County, CA for work and it is worse there
[Read the article: Architecture of a recession. ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A guy there said commercial brokers said it was 100% bad. All tenants were either a) defaulting on the rent and leaving, b) not paying but not moving out, or c) negotiating for lower rents.
And the woman I sat next to on the plane had left the mortgage brokerage industry and had started working retail again.
-
The "money multiplier" doesn't work if the banks don't lend
[Read the article: Easy money days are here again?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As the Fed "prints" money primarily by buying securities from banks, if those banks don't lend the money doesn't go anywhere. The general rule is those banks will lend all the money (while reserving capital against whatever portion of the loan they are required to) and the money goes out into the economy, comes back to the bank and is loaned again with a reserve, and so forth. But for the lending to actually occur, banks have to think it is in their best interest to make loans. Otherwise they'll just put it in treasuries or something safe, which doesn't necessarily do much for the economy except support the government's ability to borrow.
So the Fed may have to start dropping money from helicopters after all.
-
What about crate training them?
[Read the article: Ask Pablo]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just leave your baby in his or her kennel when you can't watch him or her.
Problem solved.
Seriously, though, although there isn't necessarily the paper material, wouldn't one have the same issue with carting biosolids to the landfill with any washed diaper too?
-
The superdelegates aren't supposed to be able to pick the nominee?
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Then why do they exist? If they can't keep someone they feel unelectable from getting the nomination, then they shouldn't exist. Which they shouldn't. Like it should be winner take all in the primaries.
Proportional representation is a recipe for confusion when things are closely matched. So it is neither Obama nor Hillary that is really damaging the party--it is the institutionalized kookiness of the process.
-
Ned Lamont being part of the Obama campaign should tell Joan something?
[Read the article: Don't blame San Francisco for Obama's "Bittergate"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What, that Obama is intent on winning the primary battle but losing the election war?