Suggesting an alternative
On July 26, this forum printed my letter “On Election Day” challenging the Trump-haters to take a break and write a letter in support of their favorite candidate. When not one such letter appeared, I sent a second letter, “Step up,” that was printed on Sept. 8. Since then only a handful of such letters has been printed.
So now we have gone 13 weeks with over 140 Trump-hater letters and only a few on behalf of Democratic candidates.
In my lifetime, this is the 19th presidential election and I have never seen such apathy toward a slate of candidates. Trying to convince others to vote against a candidate without suggesting an alternative is not going to succeed. Regardless of how many letters are written about our president, they aren’t going to change many minds.
I am not a Trump supporter and never have been. I am a Trump voter. I don’t care if his ego is immense. I don’t care if every word out of his mouth is a lie. I care about results. Jobs, the economy, border protection, less regulation. On the issues that I care about, he has done well.
If Trump-haters want me to change my mind, then they will have to convince me their candidate is better.
Is convenience worth it?
We love convenience. Our economy has been built on convenience: drive-thru windows, home delivery, air travel, etc. We are willing to pay extra for convenience. The problem with all this convenience is it has increased demand for fossil fuels. And this high fossil-fuel use has led to a growing inconvenience: hurricanes, floods, fires, etc. In fact, the total cost of these inconveniences will soon outweigh the cost of the conveniences. Lost wages, lost revenues, clean-up and reconstruction costs will soon exceed any gain in productivity we may have gained from all these conveniences. We must ask ourselves as a nation, can we continue this way?
Climate-related natural disasters and their related costs are going to increase. What can we do to help?
First, we can reduce our use of these conveniences, and second, we can demand action from Congress on greenhouse gases. Federal action is needed to systematically reduce fossil fuel use. The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (HR763) before Congress is a policy to reduce greenhouse gases and promote clean solutions. As a bipartisan, revenue neutral plan endorsed by 48 economists, including 27 Nobel laureates, it places a carbon fee on the carbon supplier and distributes the collected fee back to the consumer in the form of a dividend. Energy innovation is further stimulated through clean energy demand.
Contact Rep. Virginia Foxx and Sens. Thom Tillis and Richard Burr and ask them to support this conservative climate action legislation, HR 763.
My wife and I enjoyed immensely the inaugural concert conducted by Timothy Redmond (“Timothy Redmond makes dazzling debut as symphony director,” Oct. 28). We welcome Redmond to the city.
However, we also witnessed an old friend, a man who has been a pillar of this community for more than half a century, struggling — quite literally — in the balcony. He was trying to change his seat by three rows. To do it, he had to descend the steep stairs by facing to the rear, leaning over, and clutching shoulders and seat-backs along the aisle. All for want of a bloody banister — a simple, wrought-iron device that has been needed in the balcony for decades.
There were a lot of creaky, white-haired donors to the vaunted Arts Council up in the balcony that night. The UNC School of the Arts needs to help us by getting a welder from Forsyth Technical Community College to make our enjoyment less perilous.
Please submit letters online, with full name, address and telephone number, to Letters@wsjournal.com or mail letters to: The Readers’ Forum, 418 N. Marshall St., Winston-Salem, NC 27101. Letters are subject to editing and are limited to 250 words. For more guidelines and advice on writing letters, go to journalnow.com/site/forms/online_services/letter/