Humans have always adapted to change
To the editor:
About last week's National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas: I wonder if they set a good example and turned off the air conditioning at Bellagio? And did Sen. Harry Reid take the train from Washington instead of flying on a jet? And did he arrive at the hotel in an SUV?
Yes the Earth and Mars have always had climate change. And Earth has 5 billion more people than when I was born. Of course we must adapt - living things must always adapt to change. But to focus on solar cells is like a spit in the ocean. Besides, considering the costs of manufacturing, transporting and installing the panels, they may consume more energy up front than they will produce in their existence.
Spend money on U.S. engineers for research and development. And figure out how to adapt to what has always been and always will be - change.
Charles Gould
Las Vegas
Movie stars
To the editor:
Regarding the Thursday letter to the editor by Mike Mathews ("Hollywood left") and his comments on "trickle-down economics":
First, make no mistake that President Obama's polices are for the benefit of the middle-class, working people in America: The very people who go to the movie theaters and provide the wealth for the producers and directors and movie stars. I am sure Hollywood realizes this.
So isn't this really "trickle-up economics" in the purist form of capitalism?
It only makes sense that the political views of many in Hollywood would be such to protect all those consumers who support Hollywood - a concept that seems to elude a few motion-picture stars.
Sam Sainsbury
Las Vegas
Tax code
To the editor:
I do not believe the accusations Sen. Harry Reid has leveled at Mitt Romney. But if they are true - as far-fetched as they are - then Sen. Reid owes Americans an apology and his resignation from the Senate for supporting tax laws that could allow what he alleges to have occurred.
Gene Bowen
North Las Vegas
How much?
To the editor:
I am a member of the top 20 percent - the lower part, but inside of the 20 percent - and I would like to know: How much is my "fair" share of taxes? I think I should be told in definitive, certain, irrevocable terms the absolute limit of my "fair" share.
I did not get there with any government help in any way. I worked full-time, supported four kids and a wife, taught myself a very challenging profession and found my way into a job in that field by divine providence and an economy that promotes mobility. It was very hard to accomplish - 16 to 20 hours a day.
The Congressional Budget Office says that the top 20 percent of earners pay 67 percent of all federal income taxes. So is this what is meant by "fair" share? That my success should be taken from me out of proportion to others and given away to support more social programs?
If my "fair" share cannot be quantified, then "fair" share is only a carrot on a stick and can never be realized. It is simply a tool to lead the masses along a path.
If a "fair" share is reached when everyone is at the same level economically, then the only quantitative answer is a tax rate of 100 percent. This is a full redistribution of wealth.
If a "fair" share is proportional to the earnings a person makes, then what specifically is the ceiling for this "fair" share? What percentage rate is to be applied to everyone across the board?
Jeffrey Bramlett
Las Vegas
