Letters to the Editor
Wonhyo
Published Letters: 47 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Why is GM touting this study?
[Read the article: Your fuel efficiency is so hot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let's put aside the issues of human behavior and retrograde sexual politics for a moment. Considering GM is an auto company, the real question is, why the heck is GM touting this study? It only highlights the fact that GM is far behind Toyota and Honda in producing and selling environmentally friendly vehicles. Is there any marketing rationale behind releasing this study?
(To anyone who mentions the Chevrolet Volt, please, it's not due until 2010 and I won't be surprised if it's delayed beyond 2010.)
-
The 10-80-10 split in popular behavior
[Read the article: Rep. Kucinich introduces articles of impeachment]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Does moral imperative ever trump practical expediency? What is Koppelman suggesting we do about the sad state of inaction we find ourselves in?
My observations of human behavior lead me to believe the populace is divided 10%-80%-10% into those who would take positive action on an issue, those who just follow along, and those who oppose positive action on an issue.
When I consider Nazi Germany, I can't believe the general population supported the genocide of the era. Instead, I believe the 80% who just follow along happened to follow the 10% leading the genocide. Why?
Perhaps because...
- "There's basically no chance this [opposition to genocide] will go anywhere."
- The opposition to genocide did the anti-Nazis "little good politically."
- Opposing Hitler now "might very well diminish the substantial" progress Germany has made in rebuilding.
- "The action of a" lone Nazi opponent "will never come to anything, just isn't especially newsworthy."
My point is NOT that Bush-Cheney are the same as Hitler (they're not). My point is that the popular behavior that allowed the Nazi genocide to proceed is the same popular behavior that is allowing the Bush-Cheney atrocities to proceed.
It's perfectly acceptable that Koppelman states the obvious: Kucinich's articles of impeachment are unlikely to succeed. But is it necessary to then go on a personal attack, calling Kucinich a "laughingstock"? This angle of reporting legitimizes inaction and pushes the middle 80% toward accepting the Constitutional and human rights violations of the Bush-Cheney Administration. I expect better from the writers at Salon.
For the sake of Salon and its readership, I sincerely hope Koppelman's true intent was to incite outrage among the middle 80% and move them toward positive action in bringing the Bush-Cheney Administration to justice.
-
Speculation on Speculation: Lessons from the Housing Bubble
[Read the article: Oil price conspiracy theorists: Rev your engines]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There's a big debate going on over whether the current high price of oil is driven by speculation. The obvious conclusion from the recently burst housing bubble is that it was driven, at least in part, by speculation.
The less obvious lesson is that speculation can go a long way before the bubble bursts.
With this newfound knowledge of speculative investment behavior, is it unreasonable for a greedy speculator to speculate that greedy speculation will cause oil prices to continue to rise to ridiculous levels for an extended period of time, before the bubble finally pops? After all, any of the housing speculators who were lucky enough to have sold at the peak of the housing bubble must've made a killing on their investment.
Let the speculation (and counter-speculation) commence [tongue in cheek]!
[Before anybody vilifies the greedy nature of speculation, please keep in mind that the basis of our economic system is the harnessing of greedy motive to advance the economy.]
-
"Local Food" may not be "local" enough.
[Read the article: Is local food really miles better?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is insightful research, but if you take it at face value, the logical conclusion is to move towards increasingly specialized and intensive agricultural methods with higher volume transport. This only deepens the unsustainable agricultural hole we are digging for ourselves already, with unsustainable topsoil and aquifer depletion.
Perhaps the problem is that farmer's market produce is not local enough.
There's a small movement of people who produce much of their food in their own yards, using a self-sustaining combination of locally adapted wild plants. Soil is enriched by compost to close the fertilizer cycle. Watering is aided by rainwater storage and irrigation.
I'm sure many people look upon backyard agriculture with disdain, but what are the (sustainable) alternatives?