Study another waste of taxpayer money

To the editor:

Conspicuously absent from the Nevada Vision Stakeholders Group study report is any consideration for reining in government services salaries and benefits ("Study points to tax structure," Wednesday Review-Journal). With continued cost of living, merit, step and longevity increases for state workers, these costs are clearly unsustainable.

The study also seems naive when it calls for train service between Las Vegas and Reno, where the relatively few travelers are more cost effectively served by the airlines. Even the call for Las Vegas-to-Los Angeles train service needs to be questioned because Amtrak could not afford to continue this link. Both routes would require continuous taxpayer support.

Gov. Jim Gibbons was correct in vetoing this study when lawmakers first proposed it. It was a waste of money. Also, as Gov. Gibbons pointed out, the fact that there is such a push for higher taxes in Nevada is a hindrance to companies thinking about relocating to Nevada, which would diversity our economy. With our current affordable housing and available commercial real estate, we should be able to attract more businesses from California, with its high taxes and high business regulation.

We don't want to turn into another California with its high taxes and high spending.

Henry Schmid

Las Vegas

Financial tax

To the editor:

As reported in the Wednesday Review-Journal, a group called the Nevada Vision Stakeholders Group has proclaimed the need for a more broad-based state tax structure. What a surprise. Why did state Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford and company waste another $250,000 on a study whose findings were preordained?

Here is my proposal. Institute a financial transaction tax. By charging a percentage for every transaction -- whether by check, ATM, cash or electronic transfer -- the state would be flush with money. It would automatically adjust to inflation. When the Value Added Tax becomes law, it would automatically adjust for that as well. It would be broad-based in that the casinos would pay as well as the retirees on a fixed income.

The good news is that the Public Employees Retirement System would become solvent, along with step raises, etc. There would also be less money wasted on studies to determine how to take more money from more people. Government would finally be living within its means, and there would be a chicken in every pot.

That is the fantasy.

Do you really think that the report is not slanted, at least a little? If we followed their recommendations, do you think tax increases will end? Do you think that they will spend our tax money responsibly?

Darrell Welch

North Las Vegas

Good choice

To the editor:

Steven G. Hayes Sr. should review some judicial history before making comments about the U.S. Supreme Court (letter, Wednesday). Mr. Hayes criticizes the nomination of Elena Kagan because she never was a sitting judge. But before the 1950s, few of the justices of the Supreme Court were sitting judges. Many were senators, governors and scholars. This includes such luminaries as Jay, Marshall and Taft.

The trend of selecting judges started in the 1950s. That's about 150 prior years of Supreme Court judges being appointed because of their intellectual and legal abilities.

Elena Kagan has proved that she has that ability and is being commended by both major political parties.

MILTON ROSEN

LAS VEGAS

School time

To the editor:

What would you prefer to hear your child say: "Would you like fries with that?" or, "Yes, I have a college degree"? Not too long ago I heard that the Millennium Scholarship was in the black and more students were needed to qualify for it. Now it's in the red and will provide very little for our brightest students, who need funding.

What happened?

It's ironic that many elementary schools this week are celebrating "College Week" to promote higher education in one of the most poorly funded education systems, and now we can't even give our children the money to go to college? How much do we value our children in Nevada?

Charmaine Pennington

North Las Vegas

Flag waver

To the editor:

Tuesday's letter from Jerry Sturdivant, agreeing with educators in the Bay Area high school who ordered students to take off their American flag T-shirts in order to be polite and respectful to students celebrating Cinco de Mayo by wearing or displaying Mexican flags was, in a word, specious.

Comparing the wearing of an American flag image in an American school to waving a Ku Klux Klan flag on Martin Luther King Day is not only illogical, but intellectually lazy. Why not compare reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to crying fire in a public place?

The American flag, whether some students like it or not, is afforded a special status in this country. No other flag is to be flown above it, either physically or, as in this case, figuratively -- even in order to be respectful, tolerant or non-confrontational.

Ron Siess

Henderson