Reader Responses, August 3, 2014

Published on Saturday, 2 August 2014 22:29 - Written by


Your July 31 editorial was on target in exposing the hoax of manmade climate change (formerly called “global warming” before it got cooler). The climate has been changing for all know history — well before men burned fossil fuel. The Great Lakes were carved out by glaciers which formed and melted before men burned oil and gas. Thank you for telling the truth in bold terms.

This editorial was next to the wonderful commentary by Thomas Sowell who clearly exposed the misguided idea that a ceasefire in the “Israel vs. criminal” war is to the benefit of peace.

The end of World War II and the many years of peace that have followed did not come about because of a ceasefire and negotiations, but by the total defeat of Germany and Japan.

Permanent peace may never come to the Middle East, but a total victory by Israel would offer the best opportunity for at least a generation of peace.

John Prestridge



I strongly disagree with your editorial of Sunday, July 27, in which you congratulate the Smith County Commissioners Court for voting down two resolutions proclaiming the county’s reluctance to be used as a dumping ground for illegal immigrants. You state that immigration is strictly a federal matter and that we should demand that “our state and local officials tend to their own business.” If immigration is strictly a federal matter then why aren’t the illegal immigrants being dumped in Washington D.C.?

You say we should depend on our federal representatives, but they can’t do anything without the cooperation of the Executive Branch. You forget that our president ignores the legislative branch and enforces only laws — and parts of laws — that he likes, and flouts the rest.

Sure, we all sympathize with children and don’t won’t them to be hurt. But isn’t there something a little fishy with the story that parents that are supposed to be destitute can come up with thousands of dollars to pay coyotes to smuggle their children? Could it be that these parents are really investing in getting an anchor established that will eventually bring them into the U.S.?

Admittedly, the resolutions would be only symbolic, but symbolic resistance is better than no resistance at all.

Charles Hayes



Thank you for your recent editorial defending capitalism. While free markets won’t yield optimal solutions when important environmental benefits or costs aren’t recognized, economists know policies such as cap-and-trade that work with markets are preferable to policies like regulation that work against them.

In his “Wealth of Nations,” Adam Smith explained how in free markets an “Invisible Hand” guides the activities of thousands of economic actors each pursuing their self interests, and allows them to efficiently determine the optimum quantity of product to produce and price to charge. History shows planning simply can’t replicate this amazing result; the Soviet Union’s collapse and mainland China’s move to embrace markets are proof.

America’s current economic woes aren’t due to free market capitalism; they’re caused by the fact we’ve largely abandoned this concept.

Cronyism is one problem. Some businesses don’t want to compete; they’d rather enlist the power of government to gain an advantage or block new firms from becoming competitors.

The Federal Reserve Bank is another problem. The cost of credit is a key market signal, and the Fed has been holding this cost near zero instead of allowing it to be set by the market. Also, the Fed has been printing large sums of money for its “quantitative easing” program. These actions aren’t being driven by market needs; they’re being done to support the federal government’s continued deficit spending.

Instead of abandoning capitalism, we should halt cronyism and limit the power of the Fed.

Cliff Hickman