AUTO BAILOUTS
Union contract restructuring must be part of any deal

Picture in your mind a baseball player who has just hit a home-run ball over the center-field fence, and following a circuit of the bases, is declared "out" after crossing home plate. The reason: he neglected to touch third base.

So it was with The Gazette's Nov. 28 Our View, "Big executive welfare slobs," that described very well I believe, the incredible clumsiness of the CEOs of the Big Three automakers in their handling of their recent appearance before Congress.

However, the editorial's glaring "third base" oversight is the complete omission of any reference to the urgent need for the restructuring of the contracts between the automakers and the United Auto Workers union as a pivotal part of resolving the problem.

If there is any hope left for the re-emergence of the Big Three, UAW salary levels must be readjusted to parallel those of the non-union firms - Honda, Toyota, Nissan and BMW.

Because of the current and upcoming heavily Democratic composition of Congress and their dependency upon the goodwill and support of their labor union constituency, I don't believe that there is a realistic expectation that such salary scale adjustments will ever be an acceptable part of a bailout package to them. But in the interest of survival of the Big Three, the past cornerstones of our economy, if such adjustments must be made under protection within the bankruptcy courts, let's get on with it.

Marvin O. Maul, Colorado Springs

Retired auto workers at mercy of industry's economics

Lots of comments have been written about the auto bailouts. We have heard that it is the auto industry's fault, we have watched in disbelief as the CEOs went to Washington asking for more money (by private jet, no less), but have we heard from the people who have the most to lose if the companies go under? I am speaking in behalf of the thousands of retirees.

My husband spent 30 years loyally working for Ford Motor. When he retired, he was promised a pension (we voluntarily contributed extra over the 30 years), vision, dental and health care. We moved to Colorado, and bought a modest home in the mountains (a mortgage we could afford and never missed a payment).

Now our home has lost a good deal of value, dental and health care has been limited to a reimbursement of just $1,800 each, our investments tanked, and our life insurance payout has been cut in half. And now, through no fault of ours, our pension is in jeopardy.

Many in Congress keep saying that the companies are burdened with the retirees' pensions and health care, but government workers are given pensions and health care.

I just want others to be aware and to understand what it feels like to work your whole life for a company and be written off as unnecessary expense.

DeAnn L. Edwards, Woodland Park

TAKING TO THE SKIES
Reasons abound in business for taking one's own plane

For the Democrats to slam the CEOs of the Big Three American automakers for flying to Washington in private jets is proof of elected leadership and big government having no idea of the benefits of corporate aviation ("Big executive welfare slobs," Our View, Nov. 28).

All the Fortune 500 corporations utilize private jets for transportation; to single out and indict corporate aviation is absurd. Calling the auto industry leaders to fly commercial is ridiculous, too.

An aviation asset in American industry is all about application of the leading edge of science. The corporate jet is far from a perk, but an absolute necessity in today's fast-moving world. These jets are simply scientific assets. They are justified in one sense so the overpaid idiots in the ivory towers can work enroute, as well as travel on a productive schedule.

Please do not single out corporate aviation as a villain. Private jet equipment is a great asset. Flying and corporate aviation in all aspects of American business is no longer regarded as the "corporate chariot" that aircraft were referred to by the media in the early 1950s. What is truly needed now, more than ever, is total accountability.

Rick Broome, Colorado Springs

SHOP LOCALLY
Area merchants keep money at home, where it's needed

I encourage shoppers to remember to support their local merchants. Each time we shop on the Internet or buy from big conglomerates, we are putting money into the economies of other cities. If the citizens of Colorado Springs use local merchants (banks, grocery stores, clothing stores, etc.), we are supporting our city and helping keep jobs for the local population.

Jean Martin, Colorado Springs

BLACK FRIDAY
Have material goods become more important than lives?

I am wondering what has happened to us as a society. I cannot believe that we are so out of control to get a bargain that shoppers need to camp in front of a store all night in a tent.

What happened to spending time with your family?

I am amazed that on Long Island on Black Friday, 2,000 people lined up in front of a Wal-Mart and crashing the door, killing a 32-year-old temporary worker. At a Toys-R-Us, a shopper was shot in a argument. Where is the regard for a human life? Is getting a bargain really worth another person's life now?

I worked outside a Wal-Mart all day on Friday, alongside a bell ringer for the Salvation Army. People came out in streams all day with carts full of holiday presents. I noticed that very few put anything in the kettles to help support people who really need contributions all year long just to survive. I would say every one out of 20 people put something in. It was mostly children who contributed. Maybe children have not yet learned all of this holiday insanity.

Have we become too busy and caught up in the deals, bargains and the shopping rush to care about helping others? Is all of this really the reason for the season? Maybe it is time to reflect and re-evaluate what we are doing and make a difference.

Jack Lakey, Colorado Springs

CLIMATE CHANGE
Recent editorial simply wrong with its scientific reasoning

The Gazette's opinion pieces have always shown an appalling lack of understanding of science, both in terms of its practice and its knowledge base. It its latest anti-global warming diatribe, however, it also reveals a failure to observe the most basic rule of journalism -always check the sources ("True costs of warming hype," Our View, Nov. 28).

By relying on that well-known scientific journal, Investor's Business Daily, The Gazette managed to get just about every fact wrong.

Goddard Institute for Space Studies did not claim October was the hottest ever. GISS only releases interpretations like that on an annual basis. All that happened was a few ground stations submitted the wrong data, and the published raw data had to be corrected.

This correction had no significant impact on the global statistics.

Global warming does not mean that every spot on the Earth is warmer. An increasing global average temperature results in wider temperature variations, which includes things like more extreme winters and heavier snowfalls in some places. The temperature in any given place at any given time reflects weather, not climate.

The Gazette is correct that no one is certain why global temperatures rise or fall. Neither is any one certain why an apple falling from a tree strikes the ground. But there are pretty good theories for each case. Few scientists doubt global warming is real, and that greenhouse gases are an important factor in causing it.

Every major investment this country has ever made in advanced technology has boosted the economy and produced new wealth. Why should this situation be any different?

Chris L Peterson, Guffey