Letters to the Editor

Being eco-friendly only so successful in the real world

I found Jim Ferrell’s PV Times letter of June 18, interesting on various levels. First I’m glad there are people willing to buy and hopefully advance innovation in a variety of areas when I think of things like personal phones, flat screen TVs etc., their initial cost and how they improved through time. The part I also remember is how few people across the country can really afford these things.

I remember buying my first car in 1968 after leaving the military, for $300 to get to work; it wasn’t much but it served me well for almost two years, after which I got $100 for parts. Jim did not state whether his out-the-door price included the $7,500 tax credit and I certainly don’t begrudge him or anyone else who takes any legal tax break, but it makes it apparent the more the government meddles in the free enterprise system the more it seems to benefit wealthier people, while in reality giving crumbs to those struggling.

As government gets away from its primary job (essentially being an unbiased umpire, including on the world stage for this country), instead of trying to force social behavior, evidence shows new products are invented, innovation accelerates as a general rule.

There’s an interesting book called “Apocalypse Never” by Michael Shellenberger, that admits to being a hard-core “genie”, going as far as the push to outlaw meat at one time, but was open enough to look at the big picture and how the real world works. He rightly knows by being perfectly eco-friendly, while your neighbor is cooking and heating with wood or animal dung, your air won’t be clean either, so the question is do you want to pay for them to be eco-friendly too and do you have enough resources to do it for everyone else? Many government officials seem to think so, but printing money works only so long, knowing that today my $300 car would cost about $2,500 in today’s dollars.

David Jaronik

Americans need to be more aware of political plans

When we all were, or are now, in U.S. military service, we really were non-political, but we knew why we joined. We learned trades and discipline and work ethic.

Now those of us lucky enough to be back in civilian life again are more aware of the politics going on in our local, state, or country governments.

It would seem to me we should be more aware of what the politicians are planning to do to our country’s laws and Constitution. When they say they actually plan to do away with parts or all of our rights as per the Bill of Rights, we need to know why and what it is they want for our country.

It’s time for all veterans to assure to vote and do it for this country, not for a certain party. We need to weigh the costs of the U.N. and socialism/communism against our guaranteed freedoms we now have.

Henry Hurlbut

Disintegration of the family at fault for most crime

Our country is heading in the wrong direction dealing with crime, prosecution, and punishment. Shootings and other violent crimes have dramatically increased over the past few years. Shootings in Portland, Oregon where I lived before moving to Nevada are up 500%. All major cities are seeing a crime increase, small towns seem to be seeing a lesser increase but are not immune. What has happened?

As usual, when examining changing social values, there are multiple things to consider. Much of the crime is committed by young people who were raised with little discipline and have no respect for their parents, teachers, the police, or other people’s property, many of these being raised in single-parent households. So, disintegration of the family is probably a contributing factor.

Actually, this started in the 1960s with the Dr. Spock crowd, based on his book, that claimed spanking was child abuse, which was and should be illegal, but a slap or swat creates just enough of a sting, to let a child know they have done something they shouldn’t have.

During the 1950’s and 60’s, the time I grew up, corporal punishment was legal and used by parents and teachers. Many of the street demonstrators I have seen on the news claim to be students, ha, or unemployed and have too much time on their hands. The other and maybe the most relevant cause of increased crime is the change in attitude toward law enforcement. We now make heroes out of criminals and lock up the police. All towns and cities are suffering a loss of police officers by retirement or resignation and it has become increasingly difficult to recruit new candidates for the job. Since almost everybody has a camera in their pocket, anything a police officer does becomes a photo or video, some of which seem to be edited to show only the taker’s point of view, not the whole story.

We see street demonstrations with signs saying defund the police, which has been done in some cities with liberal governments like Portland, Chicago, and New York. Less police will result in more crime, as does vilifying the police so that they fear retribution if they touch somebody harshly and it winds up on video. I believe that a police officer will act respectfully if respect is returned but fighting and resisting will result in bad things happening.

Dennis Cross