Regarding your June 18 article, "India winning higher-status jobs from US": Peter Lowes states that reducing costs by outsourcing jobs is a solution, given flat revenues for US companies. Who does Mr. Lowes expect will be his customers if the job losses continue? American businesses are shooting themselves in the foot by diminishing the livelihood of each other's customers, the American people. Of course, if we were to have a deflationary cycle, especially in real estate prices, then the American worker could be paid a lot less and still have a decent living. Perhaps it's time to reboot the system.
In your article "The Mideast wars over words" (June 18), we see how both Israelis and Palestinians understand different things by the same word, complicating peace talks.
The same holds true of the media. Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are illegal under international law, and most of the world regards them as such. The Israeli media, however, refer to them as "disputed" or "contested" territories. Thus, when your paper captioned a picture from the West Bank in this article as "contested territory," it was, ipso facto, taking the Israeli side. Such political rhetoric may also color the perceptions of your readers, presenting them with a distorted view of the world.
Miriam M. Reik
Your article concerning runaway development ("Californians raise the roof over new housing," June 17) suggests that an honest discussion about the number of people our country can support, including new immigrants, is in order. California is remarkable in its absorption of new immigrants. Between 1990 and 2000, the state grew by 5 million people. A study by Californians for Population Stabilization notes that 57 percent of its growth was from direct immigration and 41 percent from births to immigrant women. At current growth rates, the state's population will top 50 million by 2025. Valiant efforts to offer all residents maneuverable freeways, affordable housing, decent schools, and open space will be stymied until federal lawmakers adopt a population policy that embraces sustainable immigration numbers and family-planning education.
Mieke H. Bomann
Regarding your June 19 article "Demo crats try energy issue to trump Bush": Unless they say specifically, "We are doing this to trump Bush," they might have more altruistic motives.
The energy issue has always been very important. The Democrats may plan to provide the highest good for the greatest number of Americans simply by preserving our health and the health of the planet by eliminating air pollution. They may want to preserve peace on earth by making us independent of fossil fuel from the Middle East. They may want to empower American farmers by encouraging them to provide home-brewed ethanol so fuel money can stay here in the US. Any number of motivations are possible besides trying to "trump Bush."
Elizabeth Peryam Reshower
Pisgah Forest, N.C.
Regarding your June 19 article "In volatile Iraq, US curbs press": Rather than censor the burgeoning Iraqi press, Mr. Bremer might spend his time reading those papers in order to figure out what he should be doing to deal with the increasing resistance and growing anger in occupied Iraq.
The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Because of the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number.
Mail letters to 'Readers Write,' and opinion articles to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to 617-450-2317, or e-mail to Letters.