"Consequently, as demand rises, so does rent."

Conservapedia

Shocking ignorance

Editor, The Times:

I was shocked to read that a teacher hadn't heard of the quite common abbreviation BCE ["Conservapedia: online reference that's read from right to right," Times, Page One, June 23]. It's used in almost every history book that is above an eighth-grade level, and should be familiar to anyone teaching history.

Here's another shocking fact for Andy Schlafly: Not everyone in the world is Christian and therefore dating things from the time of the alleged birth of Jesus is as irrelevant as dating events from the alleged founding of Rome.

A search on Schlafly reveals that he graduated from Princeton and Harvard Law School. I guess George W. Bush isn't the only ignorant Ivy League grad to achieve prominence in the conservative world.

— Geoff Kirk, Bellevue

Defining objectivity

So the new Conservapedia is to be objective? Andy Schlafly says, "We have certain principles that we adhere to, and we are up-front about them."

Later, he defends the entry on a Democratic presidential contender that said, among other things, she "may suffer from a psychological condition that would raise questions about her fitness for office. ... "

With an apparent straight face, Schlafly said this was "an objective, bias-free piece from a conservative perspective." Objective from a conservative perspective? An oxymoron, for sure.

— Dick Fike, Seattle

Boeing's success

Cuts for the connected

With regards to your editorial about how well Boeing did at the Paris Air Show, and how tax cuts helped to make this possible ["Paris, when it sizzles: Boeing delivers," Times, Editorials, June 22]: Wouldn't it have been nice to point out that many other businesses in Washington could also prosper with similar tax cuts, instead of having their taxes raised to offset the loss of revenue from Boeing?

Is the state trying to govern a free economy or trying to decide who gains and who loses, not in the marketplace, but in the back-room meetings of politicians and a few connected industries (Boeing, Microsoft, Weyerhaeuser)?

— Dave Cooper, Mukilteo

Megamansions

Condos the culprits

Megamansions are destroying the character of Seattle's neighborhoods ["Enough is enough," Times, Editorials, June 21]? And the answer is to prohibit any single-family houses more than two stories? Oh, please.

If you walked around in Ballard, Fremont, the University District, etc., you'd know that the current fad/city government push toward high-density housing is what's destroying the character of neighborhoods. I can live with replacing two single-family homes with a larger single-family house, but replacing a single-family home with six three- to four-story condo/townhouse-type structures is the real culprit!

And, by the way, councilpersons, Mr. Mayor and editors of The Times, exactly how large are your houses? Perhaps you need to "walk your talk" and downsize before requiring others to do the same.

— Shelley Jones, Seattle

Pedestrian dangers

Street anarchy must stop

Last Friday, two pedestrians were critically injured by a pickup as they crossed Alaskan Way in a marked crosswalk with an overhead sign at noon on a bright, rainless day as hundreds of tourists, noontime walkers and joggers were nearby.

I'm a pedestrian, too. Practically every day of the year I walk along the waterfront from downtown to Myrtle Edwards Park. I also walk downtown every day.

It is hard to express my anger at the people who routinely run through crosswalks, unmarked intersections and red lights. I have seen hundreds of close calls to walkers and runners and experienced more than my share. You get so angry you want to hurt the drivers; you wish they would run into a pole or a cement truck with their cellphone stuck in their ear. I am trying to convey how horrific it is on our streets; how angry the victims of abusive and selfish drivers are becoming; and how uncivil Seattle has become.

Drivers are responsible. Pedestrians are all too often targeted for enforcement, but giving tickets to jaywalkers is not the solution. Red-light running has to be enforced, talking on cellphones has to stop and the rights of pedestrians must be recognized. The anarchy on the streets must stop before it escalates.

— Tom Fox, Seattle

Nuclear waste

Passing on problem

Bill Cohen suggests that the solution to nuclear waste is to simply pass the unresolved problem down to the future to solve, like the gift that keeps on giving ["Technology will improve," Times, Northwest Voices, June 25]. Such intergenerational irresponsibility is appalling. But what really disgusts me, as an engineer, is the fact that we produce this mess, toxic for longer than man has been "civilized," to boil water for 50 years. Are we so ignorant that we can do no better?

— Crispin B. Hollinshead,

Port Townsend

Palestinian conflict

No peace guarantors

James Canning recites a litany of ideas that seem to come right out of "Alice in Wonderland" with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ["Relocate settlers," Times, Northwest Voices, June 25]. According to Canning, all Israel has to do is pull out some settlements, and all will be just fine and peaceful.

After all, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt will guarantee all that. Right? Does that mean those countries will sit on Syria and Iran, who have had a hand in supporting their surrogates like Hezbollah and Hamas to destabilize anything that approaches resolution in the area? Are we really to believe those two entities will renounce their commitment to the destruction of Israel?

During more than five decades of wars of attrition against Israel, unspeakable crimes against Jews on ships, in synagogues in France and Israeli OIympic athletes, plus the Yom Kippur invasion in 1973, precisely where were the concerns from the nations Canning suggests are peace guarantors?

Mahmoud Abbas is hardly settling for a "rump" state. He is getting help to achieve a Palestine reality hopefully unfettered by the destructive goals of Hamas and Hezbollah.

— Joseph J. Honick, Bainbridge Island

Rental housing costs

Height rules limit supply

Danny Westneat's column ["Rents soar through the roofs," Times, Local News, June 24] documents how much renters have to pay, but he describes only one aspect of the housing trade-offs Seattle has made.

The city's long-term height limitations on dwelling height artificially restricts how many housing units can be built, and even the recent rules allowing modestly taller buildings have had a limited effect in raising the housing supply. Consequently, as demand rises, so does rent.

If Seattle is serious about lowering housing costs, it must allow supply to meet demand.

Seattle is not immune to the laws of economics, and if we want to reduce rents we must prepare for physically higher apartment buildings.

— Jake Seliger, Seattle