Knee-jerk reaction belies air safety record
To the editor:
While watching the news last Saturday I learned of an experimental aircraft crash outside North Las Vegas Airport. While saddened by this, I was more saddened by Clark County Aviation Director Randy Walker's comments regarding the incident.
In a news conference following the accident, Mr. Walker seemed perplexed and genuinely angry that he lacked the power to limit the type of aircraft traffic that comes and goes at "his" airports. Mr. Walker went on to categorize all experimental aircraft, and even solo flown aircraft, as inherently dangerous. Mr. Walker followed by saying that he would be lobbying Congress to increase his power over deciding the types of traffic allowed at McCarran International Airport.
Mr. Walker's statements are alarmist at best, and indicative of a man who seems to know very little about aviation in general -- let alone aviation in his own backyard.
A quick search of the National Transportation Safety Board's aviation accident database reveals all documented aircraft accidents in the Las Vegas area going back to 1962. Database information reveals that of the 456 accidents that have taken place in the Las Vegas area since 1962, only 11 have involved experimental aircraft, and only one -- prior to the Aug. 22 accident -- involved a fatality.
That accident occurred in 1967.
Let me reiterate that: This is the first Las Vegas area accident involving an experimental aircraft resulting in a fatality since 1967.
It's a natural reaction to a tragedy to want to find fault. It's an even more natural reaction for a public servant to find some way of "fixing" non-existent problems in a reactionary fashion. An aircraft of the dubiously named category "experimental" is the natural scapegoat here.
But are Mr. Walker's energies well-placed? First Mr. Walker wants to restrict air traffic to aircraft he himself deems "safe." Next he'll be trying to restrict the makes and models of cars allowed at "his" airport.
I, for one, am glad that these decisions are kept safe from Mr. Walker's hands.
Ken Baker
SEBASTIAN, FLA.
Wind power problems
To the editor:
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's windmill power scheme has problems common with all windmill projects ("Never mind," Monday editorial).
Wind power costs about 2.5 times as much as coal-generated power. Wind power is cost-efficient only where the physical isolation of the electricity demand precludes large transmission networks. Wind power is intermittent and requires backup from conventional power.
Engineering studies from the United Kingdom's Royal Academy of Engineering found that one watt of wind power generation requires one watt of conventional backup. Wind power intermittency means that the backup unit must be quick responding, which requires natural gas fueled turbines.
Because gas turbines are not as thermodynamically efficient as coal-fired plants, more total fuel would be required. So we will end up with two complete power generation systems -- wind and conventional -- which will be more costly to the economy and environment.
GEORGE MOSS
COLUMBUS, OHIO
Righting the ship
To the editor:
Economic data from earlier this month showed a 25 percent year-to-year increase in U.S. exports and that 80 percent of last month's gain in gross national product was from exports. Exports can lead us out of our recession. The U.S. consumer, who is tapped out with mortgage and credit card debt, will not be of help any time soon.
The main reason for the increase in exports is the falling value of the dollar. If we were to level the playing field by lowering corporate income tax rates to the 25 percent other countries have, as proposed by Sen. John McCain, we would be able to obtain real, sustained job growth instead of that achieved with another stimulus "refund" or protectionist legislation as proposed by Sen. Barack Obama.
Sen. McCain's plan to get rid of the federal ethanol subsidy would increase our agricultural exports, where currently one-third of our corn crop is devoted for ethanol. America is the bread basket of the world, and increased exports would help in countries where the cost of food has doubled for many people living on less than $1 a day.
Sen. Obama's proposal to raise taxes on the rich ignores the fact that they provide most of the investment capital required for job generation.
Sen. Obama's economic plans will not help get us out of our recession, nor provide for growth in the future.
Henry Schmid
LAS VEGAS
Increasing prices
To the editor:
As the Austrian with the contrary opinion, I respectfully dissent from Review-Journal columnist Vin Suprynowicz's view that current price increases are a result of a generalized currency debasement ("Inflation running 5.6 percent ... and other nonsense," Sunday).
To me, things look a lot more like the synergistic effect of multiple contrived shortages. For example, the industrial uses of gold and silver are more critical to our well-being than are the monetary uses of these metals. If overall industrial output proceeds apace, so much as a decrease in the rate of increase can have a disproportionate effect on price.
Industry immediately pays lots more to be sure that its assembly lines do not get shut down. Mr. Suprynowicz has himself written on the government harassment of silver miners. The forced closure of Rosa Montana in Romania is the most notorious of what has happened in gold mining. (Why does the name "Soros" pop up so often in these scams?) Similar manipulations can be seen in copper, etc. We hardly need to mention the word "petroleum."
No, I do not think that there is one great, grand conspiracy directing all of this. However, there are always numerous people who would like to raise the price of what they peddle. Some of these do not care about the methods used.
They are joined all over the world by hordes of ignoramuses who operate on the premise that anything that benefits man is bad for the environment. Put these two together and you have a situation wherein the spontaneous order creates one of its counterproductive episodes.
I think we shall muddle our way through this one in reasonably good shape.
Dave Hanley
LAS VEGAS
Man with a grudge
To the editor:
After reading Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's speech Wednesday night at the Democratic National Convention, I came away with the feeling that the man just hates people who won't buy into his thinking.
As much blame as President Bush gets for all the problems in this country, I think it has been Sen. Reid who has kept the country in a closet without a light on for the past two years.
What's this man thinking, and what is his agenda? He has become an old man with a grudge, and he has brought this personality into his thinking and governing of this Congress.
Now he is starting in on GOP Sen. John McCain. Does this mean that if Sen. McCain becomes president, the people in this country must listen to at least another two years, maybe four, of bickering and getting nothing done to guide this great nation?
I don't know about the rest of the electorate, but I'm tired of this stalemate in this country. I'm sorry, but people such as Harry Reid are what's wrong with this country, and they must be dealt with by removing them from their positions.
Sen. Reid, give America a break and step down from your position in Congress so we can restart America.
Dave Mesker
LAS VEGAS
