Green energy fad driving up costs for all

John Tobin’s Dec. 29 letter on power rates was right on the money. He explains that our elected representatives, at all levels, are directly responsible for our rising energy costs. And here is why:

We have an adequate and growing supply of low-cost, energy-producing resources — coal, natural gas, petroleum and, yes, nuclear. But the power brokers believe all the really big money has already been made in the production of these by those evil millionaires we read about daily.

So these same politicians looked around for other products that they could promote and make a bunch of money off in the process. Hence, the government’s enhanced interest in “clean” energy, primarily solar and wind.

But energy produced from these sources is extremely expensive and can’t compete with energy produced from the old technology (read: low cost). Not to worry. After all, these are lawmakers. So, what did they do?

First, they started a campaign to smear the low-cost fuels as being too dirty, responsible for killing people, etc. When that didn’t work fast enough, they put restrictions on the production of these fuels, or demanded that we stop producing them — no more exploration, mining or drilling, with the results that the cost of this energy went up, in some cases drastically. When new deposits were discovered, they simply refused to allow the transport of the raw materials.

And here are the net results.

Because alternative energy is too expensive, even with massive government subsidies, they enacted policies that, over time, have caused the price of our regular energy to increase, thereby reducing the difference. It’s called … incrementalism!

Our founders gave us the means to control our politicians when they go against the will and interests of the voters. It is called an election.

And it works only if the voters pay attention and hold them accountable.

Are you ready to hold them accountable?

B. Wilderman

Las Vegas

Trust fund

To the editor:

Robert Samuelson is at it again (Tuesday commentary, “Reflections as a new year arrives”) with his misstatements about the dismal condition of the Social Security and Medicare programs.

He states that, “Annual spending on Social Security already exceeds defense spending; Medicare is approaching non-defense discretionary spending.” How can defense spending be compared with Social Security? Is there a special tax for defense spending that workers and their employers contribute to? He knows very well that the answer is no.

Mr. Samuelson wishes to give the impression that Social Security and Medicare payments are a “cost” that is a drain on the budget, when in reality Social Security is funded by a payroll tax that should not be co-mingled with general tax revenue. Payroll taxes should be deposited into the Social Security Trust Fund. This is where the payments to seniors come from.

I firmly believe that he and others like him are deliberately withholding the truth about Social Security and attempting to brainwash the general public into believing that the program is an entitlement, such as food stamps or welfare. It is not. It is fully funded by contributions (not taxes) paid by workers and their employers.

Another truth that Mr. Samuelson completely ignores: The Social Security trust fund has been raided by our federal government to tune of approximately $4.5 trillion.

I am hoping that there are others out there like me who are outraged at this attempt to compare Social Security and Medicare to welfare programs and give the appearance that Social Security recipients are receiving a handout when in reality they are simply receiving benefits that they earned by contributing to a trust fund.

Anthony J. Marinelli

Las Vegas

Signs, signs

To the editor:

Why don’t the county commissioners do something useful, like clean up all the billboards and trash-ghetto signs plastered all over?

Areas of unincorporated Clark County are littered with every imaginable sign, from apartment advertisements to car washes, garage sales, etc. Businesses tack them up everywhere without any repercussions and no intentions of taking them down. It’s worse than any graffiti or pigeon problem.

A rule against these signs would be easy to enforce, as the addresses and phone numbers are written on them. How about a $500 fine per sign? That should pay for enforcement.

Please, let’s stand up and start cleaning up Clark County.

John Turkovich

Las Vegas

Bike paths

To the editor:

In regard to the recent articles concerning the new bike laws and bike lanes, may I make a few suggestions.

Turn all the roadways within the cities of Las Vegas and Henderson into bike paths, no autos. Build parking garages at various locations outside those boundaries. Then we could all bike to our cars there and motor to other places.

We would need to make allowances for the elderly and handicapped, such as side cars and/or electric-assisted bikes (solar powered).

This would also provide the added benefit of construction jobs, some relief for developers and speculators and revenue for the various governments by way of fees and taxes.

This might inconvenience those of us who prefer to be able to get somewhere in a comfortable and timely fashion, but maybe I am just being politically incorrect.

Jerry Andreoli Jr.

Las Vegas