How about choice when it comes to power?
To the editor:
I see NV Energy wants to increase our power bills (Wednesday Review-Journal). The company can get away with this because there is no competition. There is no competition in Nevada because in March 2001 the governor of the state decided the deregulation of the power company in Nevada was not in the best interest of the consumers.
Does anyone think what is happening now is in the best interest of the people of Nevada?
Other utilities were deregulated to the advantage of the consumer. Other states, such as Ohio, have been deregulated for years and it works well. If you don’t like the way your electric company is treating you, there are other choices.
Richard Evans
Las Vegas
On the line
To the editor:
All of this fighting over drawing the new political boundaries is big joke. Why don’t we get the ridiculous gerrymandering out of the picture and draw the new boundaries using common sense?
Let the new districts be determined by starting at the southeasternmost point in the state and start going northwest until the required population is reached, thus determining the first district. Then continue in the same manner to find the second, third and fourth districts.
Gerrymandering is a ridiculous practice and should be outlawed. Drawing a district to represent a particular party or ethnic group should be illegal.
Bryce Lee
Las Vegas
Problem gambling
To the editor:
In response to the Tuesday story, “Pastor was gambling addict”:
Having spent 14-plus years in the gaming business, I was still caught off-guard by this incident. Maybe it was the person involved, the source of the funds, the amount of money lost — or maybe it was all of the above.
The story that is likely to get lost in the shuffle, however, is the lip service that is paid to the issue of compulsive gambling. If by some effort we could significantly reduce the number of problem gamblers, how would this affect the gaming industry’s bottom line?
Losing that amount of money should get someone’s attention. Whether it is for marketing purposes, or Title 31 purposes, one of the casino’s primary responsibilities is to identify which patrons are running in significant amounts of cash through their properties. If the casino let him gamble away that amount of money without inquiring as to how valuable a player he was, that is just simply gross incompetence.
If, on the other hand, the casino’s marketing department had vetted this individual and still took the money, it is nothing but another corporate pariah. Incidents such as this leave a lasting black eye upon the brand that is Las Vegas and the gaming industry as a whole.
Locals and tourists alike need to make a decision as to how and where to spend their hard-earned money. Do we want to support an organization that will throw their few remaining corporate values out the window in pursuit of the almighty dollar? Or do we want to insist that these companies stop using this unspoken “gamble at your own risk” mantra which has been in place for decades?
Before the big money grab starts with the legalization of online gambling, an honest discussion, devoid of special interests, needs to take place about how much personal and societal destruction we are willing to tolerate as a result of problem gambling.
Frank Alonso
Las Vegas
Favorite bailouts
To the editor:
If I lived in the state of Michigan, especially the city of Detroit, as a Republican there is no way could I vote for Mitt Romney for president after the statement he made Tuesday night in the debate at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire.
Mr. Romney said he was in favor of the bailout of Wall Street bankers, but would not have voted for the bailout of the auto industry, General Motors and Chrysler.
The automakers have paid back the loans and are hiring again and doing well. The banks are not doing anything to help the middle class and poor people. So to vote for Mr. Romney would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
I don’t think he will win in the state of Michigan.
Lloyd St. James
Henderson
Real meathead
To the editor:
On Wednesday afternoon I was reading the Opinion section of the Review-Journal and came upon the letter headlined “Pothead hippies.” Boy, what a good laugh I had.
When I came to the end and saw the author’s name, I was somewhat perplexed. It was written by Warren Willis Sr., not Archie Bunker.
Juanita Demchak
Las Vegas
Tax hike
To the editor:
As Rep. Michele Bachman pointed out about presidential rival Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 tax reform plan, the devil is in the details.
Retired senior homeowners earning less than $40,000 per year pay about 8 percent to the IRS after deductions. Mr. Cain’s 9-9-9 plan would raise that bill to 9 percent, plus an additional 9 percent on all expenditures for an effective tax rate of about 18 percent. That’s about a 125 percent tax increase on those least able to afford it.
Be careful what you wish for.
Skip Blough
North las Vegas
Job creators
To the editor:
I read Daniel Olivier’s Friday letter to the editor, “On the job.” The only thing I can agree with him on is that job creators are not in business to create jobs. They create jobs to make more money.
Well, duh. What’s wrong with that? He also confused lack of certainty with financial suicide. I never hired someone just so he would have money to spend on my “stuff” and other businesses’ “stuff.”
Mr. Olivier’s funniest line was about his “brilliant” president’s stimulus spending. Almost a trillion dollars spent for a handful of jobs created.
If the president would ease up on the regulations, you would see dramatic results.
His regulatory czar is Cass Sunstein. Do a search on him and ask yourself if he’s good or bad for business.
Richard Santa Maria
Las Vegas
