Wasn’t oversight supposed to be the answer?
To the editor:
Over the past two-plus years, we’ve all experienced the financial meltdown. Many people have blamed Wall Street as the cause, or at least as a major contributor. We’ve also heard that the meltdown was caused by a lack of regulations, unenforced regulations, government involvement and corporate greed. Frankly, there’s more than enough blame to go around.
Whatever the cause, Wall Street, our financial markets and the government have let us down. They didn’t do enough to prevent this catastrophe. Now we are all paying a harsh price.
Congress has created new regulations, and Wall Street executives say they are working to prevent a recurrence. Good!
Then, on Friday, it was reported that the Obama administration has been putting pressure on Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s. There have been high-level discussions at the White House and even conversations involving the U.S. embassy in London. Not only doesn’t Mr. Obama want the rating services to downgrade the United States, he doesn’t even want them to talk about it.
What happened to all the talk about financial oversight? How are investors going to have correct information if the reporting agencies are being pressured? The White House has lots of ways to bring pressure. Is this administration saying that financial oversight applies to everyone but the White House?
This administration is being dishonest. If a private company tried to put this kind of pressure on S&P or Moody’s, the CEO and everyone else involved would be in jail.
So much for this administration caring about this country and our financial markets. What they care about is covering their butts and avoiding the consequences of their actions.
Philip Cohen
Las Vegas
Validating the hoax
To the editor:
In his Tuesday letter, Albert G. Marquis calls on the authority of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and of the Union of Concerned Scientists to confirm his faith in the human-caused climate catastrophe, while doubting the scientific expertise of columnist Sherman Frederick.
Where do I start? First, there is the “Oregon Petition” (see Internet) where 31,487 independent U.S. scientists, including 9,029 who hold Ph.D.s, state that anthropogenic global warming is a hoax.
Also see on the Internet the “Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change” where 712 independent scientists, including 142 world-renowned climatologists, state the same.
As for the Union of Concerned Scientists, its beginning was some 40-odd years ago as a pro-Soviet group agitating for unilateral U.S. nuclear disarmament, with its origins in Australia. The U.N. panel is a group of socialist/Marxist propagandists agitating for a U.N.-sponsored world government.
Marc Jeric
Las Vegas
No dummies
To the editor:
I believe there should be an addition to the way jurors are selected in any court of law: They should be given a simple IQ test to determine their mental capacity.
PAT KRAFT
LAS VEGAS
Fit right in
To the editor:
What’s the big deal and all the noise about the unfinished, defect-plagued Harmon building in CityCenter? Just uproot it and move it to the north end of the Strip. It’ll fit right in.
M. SEIERSEN
LAS VEGAS
No more building
To the editor:
Once again, here I sit, shaking my head in disgust. Why? I just read the July 7 front-page on how developer Jim Rhodes is submitting a plan to build 7,000 homes overlooking Red Rock Canyon.
Seven thousand homes, each occupied by people who will want to plant flowers, flush toilets and take showers. Water. It is always about the water.
As a resident of Las Vegas for more than 30 years, I am acutely aware of our ever decreasing supply of water. I do my part on a daily basis to conserve. I turn off the tap while brushing my teeth. I have removed grass and replaced it with desert landscaping. I comply with watering restrictions.
I just don’t get it. The water authority is screaming “No water!” and yet Mr. Rhodes wants to continue building.
I have no doubt that he will get his way, that these homes will be built. But I am frustrated. Why should I (and so many other Las Vegans) try so hard? And what is the true status of the water? Surely, Mr. Rhodes would be denied if water were that scarce.
I know what we need: a moratorium on building. Ha, ha. Like that’s going to happen.
LINDA GREEN
LAS VEGAS
Be specific
To the editor:
In response to your Tuesday article, “Oceguera announces his run”:
All of you candidates need to be very specific about your reasons for wanting to represent me. “I will stand up to Washington”? “I will cut wasteful spending”? “I will look out for you”? Generalities don’t cut it.
You need to let me know exactly what spending you will cut. You need to let me know exactly what you mean by “stand up to Washington.” You need to specify how you will “look out for me.” This way, I can maintain an accurate scorecard and monitor your pronouncements against your actions.
Thank you very much.
Robert S. Tobias
Las Vegas