Letters to the Editor
barbw
Published Letters: 3 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Take a deep breath
[Read the article: Ask the pilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wow. Having never been trapped for more than 2 or 3 hours on a plane before takeoff, I guess I don't harbor the fury that others do. I do think that I would go insane if trapped on a plane for 10 hours and perhaps I would react differently.
I get that the airlines are extremely complicated and that there is a lot of gray in making decisions. I am usually a dyed in the wool democrat (protect the public, etc.) but I cannot sign on to legislation to cure the airline woes. Laws might work to force certain behaviors but in a lot of cases it does not work very well. It becomes the cost of doing business to pay people off who are negatively affected by something the company did. It adds to the judicial workload and creates more targets for litigation-chasing lawyers.
After all that, I really think that complaining should create an obligation to come up with a solution but I'm not sure what the solution is. I do think the CEO of JetBlue took a good first step. He wants his company to do the right thing. Let's give him a chance to fix it and then give him our business. Oh, and to those who try and paint everything as black and white and call people names instead of engaging in thoughtful discussion - take a deep breath and try again. It's much more satisfying to actually engage.
I like your column and learn something from every article - even if I think some of your arguments might be less than rigorous, I like your enthusiasm and appreciate your insight.
-
The reasons are historical
[Read the article: What is the rationale behind the prescription drug laws?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I wanted to quickly chime in on your prescription drug discussion. Drugs were not really regulated until early in the 20th century and, of course, the impetus to regulate them was very political. Many unregulated substances were highly addictive (including all the coca derivatives) and others were tainted. As a result, the Congress passed the Pure Food and Drug Act. Initially it was a labeling act but morphed to prevent access to certain substances except through a physician. That scheme has not changed and, in fact, has only gotten stronger over the years. Initially physicians could "prescribe" addictive substances to addicts as treatment but the law was changed to criminalize that behavior because "addicts were bad people." I could go into the historical build-up of the bureaucracy and the lead up to the war on drugs, all of which further fuels the politicians to further regulate prescription drugs, but I have to get back to work too. A very interesting topic. Thanks.
-
Rude and Disrespectful
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a 51 year old woman and I suppose I can probably be considered a "mainstream feminist." After a lot of thought, I am supporting Barack Obama. What I most resent about the knee-jerk reactions from some other women (both older and younger than me) is the utter dismissal from them that thoughtful people can have different opinions. No matter who I support, it really honks me off to have anyone just dismiss my choice out of hand, treating me like a misbehaving child. Ultimately, it's rude and disrespectful.