Letters to the Editor
Alan Lloyd
Published Letters: 290 Editor's Choice: 63
-
Why are passengers treated badly?
[Read the article: Ask the pilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For the most part, airline passengers are treated badly because the frontline employees that they interact with are also treated badly. It's a longstanding maxim in the business world that how well a company treats the frontline employees is a good indicator of how they, in turn, will treat the customers.
The problem blooms when we reach a situation like we have now in the US. Distances are often large, and there is no practical alternative to air travel. I can only imagine that a functional high speed intercity rail system covering many travel corridors would go a long way towards making airlines a little more responsive to their customers, if only because those customers would then have an alternative.
Having been on the receiving end of airline stonewalling on occasion, I can say that there are definite differences among carriers, and as frustrating as delays for whatever reason can be, if a gate attendant or flight attendant tells me something, or helps rectify a situation, I always thank them. Gladly. And I try as best I can to not take it out on those who I know are being abused by their corporate taskmasters - I have to deal wtih that airline for the time I'm flying, and then I go home. They have to deal with it every day on the job.
-
Flag burning vs. cross burning
[Read the article: Capture the flag]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Republican leadership of the House and Senate have put a great amount of effort into publicizing an attempt to amend the US Constitution to prohibit flag burning. The most recent statistics show that there were four flag burning incidents in the US last year.
The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that a cross is burned somewhere in the US on an average of once a week.
When the Republicans put thirteen times the effort into banning such acts as burning crosses, we can then believe them sincere in their efforts.
-
American values? hahahahahahahahahaha...
[Read the article: The "American Values Agenda"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And that's the proper response. For far too long, the Democrats I know have been serious and thoughtful, and while I tend to value that, what the party really needs, and fast, are (a) a sense of humor, and (b) a mean streak.
You read it right, folks. Ridicule, open, loud, and long. That's the proper response to this and much of the Republican "plan". Get mean, laugh at them in public. Embarrass them however, whenever, and wherever possible. And brutalize them to the extent possible in every other imaginable way. Use whatever "dirt" comes our way. Make every sordid little detail about them not only public, but something they have to take the time to defend publicly.
Serious and thoughtful don't win elections. They do make for good governance afterwards, so don't let those folks drift too far off towards the sidelines, just stop bringing knives to gunfights.
-
I am getting older
[Read the article: World out of control]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's true. I don't claim all-seeing perspective yet, and still I see things shaping up in very ominous ways. Unlike the last great tension (the Cold War) there is no balancing between two global powers with both having causes to project and territories to defend. This time, it's one global power facing off against a diffuse multitude of small, often non-state oppponents, and on top of that, multiple regional conflicts in which the lines of support and opposition are often quite thinly drawn.
My own bet for the hottest "trouble spot" is still Kashimir, simply because it features two nuclear-armed opponents facing each other with a good cast of non-state actors thrown in to muddy the mix. That said, the Middle East certainly seems to be heating up in its own intractable ways - is there really anything that all parties there can ever find agreeable as a way of reducing tensions?
Climate change is the wild card. If floods of refugees begin to move around the world, we will see things I suspect we can not now imagine. And since many seem unwilling to say it, I will: A large part of man-made climate change is not only attributable to US fossil fuel consumption, but in general to the ever-rising population worldwide. And that rising population comes at a high cost - especially in the developing world, where fertility rates are highest. Infrastructure development and maintenance cannot keep up with the rate of population increase. The simple capacity of many poorer nations to feed their people is straining. As they strip near areas of fuel wood, desertification increases, and the capacity to grow food crops shrinks. The spiral continues.
I'm the first to admit I have no solutions. I do think, though, that it's past time we see our highest calling as making life better for everyone worldwide, not blowing up significant numbers of "those other people" who don't think, look, or sound like us in order to control their resources. If people everywhere were well-fed and housed, would there really be as much insurrection and terrorism afoot? I think not.