Congratulations to retired diplomat and Blade editorial board member Dan Simpson, and to The Blade, for Mr. Simpson's outstanding Nov. 17 column, "U.S. Needs To Warm Up to Kyoto Protocol."
I was one of several speakers at the original Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro more than a decade ago. In spite of vicious and irresponsible efforts to downgrade its possible dire consequences, honest scientists are nearly united in their concerns over the probable terrible ramifications of inaction in this global warming crisis.
Action now is not that costly. Further delay will make cost control and environmental protection nearly impossible to achieve. The three largest research corporations in the world are DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, and Ford. Each is spending more than $7 billion annually in research. Much of that investment is in emissions control. They know the problem.
The U.S. position on global warming has severely damaged U.S. credibility throughout the world. It is so unnecessary! The credit exchanges now accepted in the Kyoto protocol offer economically reasonable options for the management of carbon emissions.
Here in Toledo, more than 8,000 tons of flared methane is emitted annually from the Hoffman Road landfill. That's the equivalent of 160,000 tons annually of carbon dioxide. That is a huge waste of energy and unacceptable air pollution. Toledo officials are now moving to utilize this opportunity and terminate the pollution problem.
J. PATRICK NICHOLSON
N-VIRO Energy Systems
Dan Simpson, in his Nov. 17 column, "U.S. needs to warm up to Kyoto protocol," forgot the most important reason why not to warm up to the Kyoto protocol.
Interestingly he touched on it without ever mentioning it.
He pointed out that the Chinese economy is growing at 8 percent per year and demanding more and more oil. What he didn't mention is the Kyoto protocol makes the advanced industrial nations (not China) responsible for removing most of the pollutants while allowing Third World countries to develop their industry with relatively little or no responsibility to control pollution.
We are already being shafted by NAFTA and GATT to the detriment of our economy. Why should we bear the burden with other advanced industrial countries of clearing up pollution while China, fast becoming the economic giant of the 21st century, has little or no responsibility for curbing pollution from its fast growing industries?
Only when the Kyoto protocol is amended to have the same controls on all new-source pollution and equal new controls on old sources of pollution, no matter where pollution originates in the world, should we think about signing it.
After all, what good would it do for the world environment and us to clean up our pollution if China and other Third World nations are allowed to just churn out more and more pollution while at the same time taking more and more of our jobs? Then not only would we be participating in the loss of our jobs through NAFTA and GATT but also through the Kyoto protocol as well, with nothing gained for the world environment.
The headline on the Nov. 17 Associated Press article read, "Marine's fatal shot enrages Sunnis." The article went on to talk about how a young Marine shot a "wounded and apparently unarmed man."
The American public should be more than enraged with the manner in which this war is being reported.
The "apparently unarmed man" was in a mosque from which the Marines had been receiving fire. Two times in as many days the Marines had to clear the mosque of hostiles. The young Marine just one day before had been wounded in the face while another in his unit was killed by the booby-trapped body of one of these thugs.
Their tactics: kidnappings, beheadings, and murder of civilians, the latest a British woman, fighting from religious buildings, white flags of surrender and then ambush, booby-trapping the wounded and dead, sending children to their deaths in suicide bombings, hiding behind women and children and fighting in civilian garb.
"Rules of War" cannot be followed by one side when there are no rules or honor on the other.
The young Marine who pulled the trigger should be given a medal along with accolades from all Americans!
JOHN A. HALL
Here we go again! After passing a 3/4 percent renewal tax for the city of Toledo, our elected officials want to hit us with a "garbage fee" of $84 a year for a homeowner. This "fee" translates into an extra $7 million a year for city coffers. We are also being told this will not be a permanent tax. Yeah, right!
Since when has any governing body ever turned its back on an extra seven mill a year? This will most definitely be a permanent tax that rises every year to keep up with growth of the departments it is meant to supplement.
If the average homeowner pays $2,000 a year in property taxes, this extra $84 equals almost 5 percent of the tax bill, not including what we already pay in our current property taxes for trash collection!
This is inept leadership and Mayor Jack Ford should take the blame. He is trusted, by us, to run the city with fiscal responsibility and has failed miserably.
How can any city in a recession even think about bringing in new business or industry with our current - and I'm sure future - level of taxation?
How much more can we pay? Only to be held hostage by our elected officials.
Is this mayor really deserving of a yearly salary greater than our governor? And is our mayor really deserving of his office? Do not get me wrong. I am for a safe city, but I feel the funding of these departments can come from other cuts rather than a knee-jerk taxation.
Before everyone jumps on the $7 a month bandwagon, let's go back to the 1980s when there was a similar situation. To save police, fire, and trash pick-up, the city came up with a "temporary" 3/4 percent additional payroll tax. Instead of saving, it was spend-spend-spend, so when the tax was due to expire, the city had to put on a drive to convince the voters to renew it.
That's the way it has been up to the present time. On Nov. 2, the 3/4 percent tax was on the ballot for early renewal. Each time it has come up, it is touted as being for services, especially for fire, police, and garbage pickup.
Seems like when a person or group has an agenda (this time the $7 a month garbage pickup) they start off with talks of layoffs and scare tactics weeks before it is due to happen just to get the ball rolling and "test the water" for possible backlash from the public.
Mayor Ford suggested $5 a month and then some bright young man said we might as well go for $7 and get a little extra and the voters will still like us. They just love to pay extra for the services they are already paying for.
Should we tell your Nov. 17 Forum contributor that homosexual couples are also sacrificing to bear, raise, and educate children, or should we leave her to her ignorant bliss?
I have a simple solution to the city cash crunch. The Blade's list of delinquent taxpayers made me sick. I am on a fixed income. After prescriptions, my largest monthly bill is my property tax. But I do pay my tax. How do some people get away not paying?
My solution: ALL city employees, top to bottom, take a 3 percent to 5 percent cut in salaries. Wouldn't it be more fair for all to have a little less than some to have nothing? We need our police and firemen, and we need our garbage collected.
BETTE M. JONES