Online-only letters

Bridge tolls

Saving time costs big

I find it interesting that a study determined that speeds over the 520 bridge will increase from 26 mph to 40 mph due to the tolls ["Will $6 tolls drive people from bridge?," Times, page one, July 24].

Wow! This reduces travel time from the old toll plaza to Montlake from 8 minutes, 18 seconds to 5 minutes, 24 seconds. For a savings of 2 minutes, 54 seconds, we will have to pay an average of $3.43 (or more) each way during peak times, thus, costing us $70.67 per hour spent on the bridge.

Anyone working for minimum wage at $8.07 an hour will spend 51 minutes of work each day to pay for the round trip. The economics are just not there when it takes 51 minutes of work to pay for less than 3 minutes commuting.

What if enough people choose not to use the bridge? Who would be stuck with the bill? Dumb question. All the rest of us would pay.

— John Gjolmesli, Mountlake Terrace

State spending

Free market can't solve everything

I found letter writer John Nothdurft's response in Friday's Seattle Times a bit humorous ["Tax increases won't fix problems," Times, Northwest Voices, July 25]. He said he is the budget and tax legislative specialist for The Heartland Institute in Chicago. At Heartland's Web site I found this:

"Heartland's mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems."

We can hope, but I don't think the free market has all the solutions (e.g. the current meltdown of the mortgage/housing industry).

Nothdurft may be eminently qualified for his position, but he lacks knowledge of history. He quotes Thomas Jefferson with "Never spend your money before you have it" and proceeds to lecture us about heeding this advice. Jefferson was perhaps the worst U.S. president when it came to finance. It took nearly two generations just to retire the personal debt he built up while in retirement.

I'm a great fan of Jefferson, and he supplied quotes for many situations. But in this case his advice was more along the lines of "do as I say, not as I do." I'm sure improvements can be made in the state government's fiscal policy, but we don't need Nothdurft's help, thank you very much.

— Dick Culp, Bainbridge Island

Obama vs. McCain

Forget Europe; focus on America

What is going on with our presidential candidates ["Obama aims to win over the world," Times, page one, July 25]? We have a Democrat with little or no experience, barely through puberty (Sen. Barack Obama) and a Republican dinosaur who is older than dirt (Sen. John McCain).

Our economy is in shambles and the working family is struggling to pay $4.50 a gallon for gasoline, yet these candidates are jet-setting across the world to campaign for what? Are any of these European people registered voters here in America? Hint: It's the American economy we're concerned about, stupid(s)!

Obama and McCain. Is this the best we can do? Wake me up when the election is over.

— Dave Burns, Puyallup

Brightwater deal

Give local workers the jobs

My response is somewhat belated but I was shocked and appalled that Brightwater has hired a big corporation to haul their excavated dirt instead of using the Seattle-owned trucking companies that had expected to do the work ["Minority firms told no deal on expected Brightwater work," Times, Local News, July 22]. That is like a slap in the face to the businesses in Seattle and an insult to the taxpayers who are underwriting the project.

I do not understand why a huge local project would seek international workers, especially in our current economic climate. Our local companies need to be supported, especially by projects for which the taxpayers are struggling to pay! We do not need to continue to support big corporations from out of the area so that the "rich get richer" while we ignore the hard workers in our midst. I hope there is a huge outcry about what must have been like a "knockout" blow to some of the smaller local companies that were expecting the work.

I'm very saddened that the decision makers made the choice they did. It is a decision that might have far-reaching, negative effects on some people in this area.

— Mary Bartholet, Shoreline

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Government's financial policy biased

With the current crisis in the financial industry, the acronym TBTF (Too Big To Fail) has become commonplace ["Rescue plan for housing is on the way," Times, page one, July 24]. Companies like Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac get bailouts when they make monumental financial blunders.

But recall how the Republican-controlled Congress in 2005 halted the push for bankruptcy relief for American families: Regular Americans have to be responsible for their own decisions with no slack for medical emergencies or other unforeseen circumstances. Big corporations, in contrast, get privatized profits but socialized losses. The average American gets to pay no matter what happens.

We need a new acronym for this biased financial policy: TSTCA (Too Small To Care About). That's you and me.

— Kevin Cole, Seattle

Bike-rider assault

Critical Mass crossed civil law

I have been a victim of Critical Mass just like the driver in the latest tragic assault ["How did bike-ride violence erupt?," Times, page one, July 27]. I was fortunate in that the "mad dog" bicyclists decided to move on before assaulting me or seriously damaging my property.

Isn't it time for the police to actually enforce the traffic laws and aggressively maintain order on the streets of Seattle? This incident was more than civil disobedience. Critical Mass is a terrorist gang, assaulting pedestrians, motorists and others unlucky enough to need to be in their presence.

I don't think that it is a stretch to compare them to car bombers, or other zealots who resort to violence to make their point. These bicyclists aren't average folks who ride for fun or to save on fuel. These are outrageous lawbreakers.

By allowing terrorists to organize and roam the streets at will, we all lose our freedom. Civil laws are created to protect us from this kind of paramilitary action. A line has been crossed here.

— William Schilb, Bellevue

Bicyclists need a permit, police intervention

I live on Capitol Hill and happened to walk by Aloha and 15th Avenue East while police were still questioning witnesses and cleaning up after the violent incident between Critical Mass riders and a driver of a small car. What the bikers did to the car was pretty impressive: broken windshields — front and rear — and slashed tires. It doesn't take much force to bend a bike wheel, but it takes a lot of force to smash in windshields.

I mention this because your coverage of the incident included a photo of the bicycle but not of the car. For fair reporting, photos of the damaged car should have been included. In fact, what happened to the car "told" a lot of the story.

Also, mass bike rides are demonstrations. U.S. citizens have the blessed right to demonstrate for whatever cause. However, I thought that when large groups choose to demonstrate in the streets, like Critical Mass, they had to get a permit from the city. With a permit, the area or route of the demonstration would be blocked off and police protection would be provided — to protect both the demonstrators and the public.

Detours would be set up, to allow traffic flow to continue and for people to get to the places they need to be, whether that be to a wedding, dinner reservation, the emergency room or the labor and delivery ward of a hospital. When such demonstration procedures are followed, the demonstrators can make their point, and bystanders — interested or disinterested — and people in cars can remain unharmed or go on their way.

Critical Mass does not have the right to stop the flow of vehicular traffic just by asserting themselves as a literal, physical "critical mass" in the streets without permission to demonstrate and the proper protection in place for all citizens. Why does the Seattle Police Department allow this to happen? Are they even aware of when these hundreds of bikers take to the streets?

When cyclists start behaving like vigilantes, in no way are they helping their cause; they are harming it in the biggest way possible, losing sympathy from car drivers, law-abiding cyclists and their supporters. They are likely to produce the opposite result of what they intend; they likely will make it more dangerous for cyclists, as they antagonize drivers of motor vehicles!

For safety, drivers and cyclists have to have mutual respect, and both have to obey the rules of the road.

— Katherine Koerner, Seattle

Hold bicyclists to traffic laws

One sure step to reduce bicycle-directed road rage is to hold bicycle riders to the same strict law enforcement as cars. The overwhelming majority of bicyclists ride safely and courteously, obeying laws and using common sense, but there is a visible and vocal minority who arrogantly, selfishly and provocatively flout basic traffic laws, ride four-or-more across, completely block lanes and cause long, impatient and increasingly angry block-ups behind them.

— Harry Zeitlin, Seattle

Permit could have prevented incident

It's a shame that the Seattle Public Safety Department allowed Critical Mass, a cyclists' group, to take the matter in their own hands in carrying a public procession once a month for years without a valid permit.

Motorists should hold both the city of Seattle and the Critical Mass organization accountable for the attacked man's injury and his automobile damage. Had the permit been issued for the bicycle procession, safety officers would have accompanied the bicycle riders and stopped the situation before taking its toll on the car and the motorist.

Bicycle riders think they own the roads, rather than share them with cars. It has become "we versus them" for the bicyclists. It's a resurfacing of the Vietnam hippies type or mobster mentality of the 1960s in the 21st century that must be stopped from taking roots in our society of law and order.

— Shantu Shah, Portland, Ore.

Mayor, do your job

I have an answer to your July 27 headline "How did bike-ride violence erupt?"

For several years Mayor Greg Nickels and his chief of police have allowed a small group of urban thugs, the Critical Mass bicyclists, to ride roughshod over our community. Their intimidation antics are not acceptable to a civil society based on mutual respect and equal protection.

Given the mayor's promotion of the bicycle as a legitimate instrument of commuting in our fair city, one would expect hizzoner to insist that all cyclists, including Critical Mass riders, conform to the same laws and behavior as drivers of cars. I suppose that in the eyes of the city administration there exists the possibility that "some commuters are more equal than others" (my apologies to George Orwell).

Mayor, do your job.

— Jim Hubert, Seattle

Math gender gap

Stop pitting boys against girls

Regarding your editorial "Girls + Math: Go Figure" [Times, July 27], which concludes: "[T]he cheery news for girls and math is balanced by the reality that a lot more work needs to be done to prepare boys for the next step in education": Your editorial presents a dilemma offering a no-win situation to girls.

You seem to think that when girls do well in school, meeting or exceeding standards, they become a threat to boys. When girls improve, instead of acknowledging our math programs' successes — that we're finally reaching all of our students — your editorial pits girls' accomplishments against boys'.

The study never said boys' math scores are falling. Rather, it reports that girls' scores are rising to meet that of their male counterparts.

As a nation, we need all of our children to do well. How can we be threatened because those who were behind are now catching up? Are we going to say the same thing about racial minorities, whose students are beginning to catch up to white kids' performances in some areas? Why can't we be excited about our progress overall, rather than pitting our kids against one another in some kind of gender (and no doubt racial) competition?

— Deborah Murphey, Redmond

Stupidification

Intelligence isn't the opposite of stupid

While syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. correctly identifies the problem of stupidity in America, he fails to define its primary causes ["The stupidification of America," Times, syndicated column, July 27].

Intelligence is not the opposite of being stupid. Intelligence is merely a potential one has to appropriately "analyze, draw conclusions from or otherwise 'use' information." Unexamined, our human brains are usually unreliable in reaching unbiased assessments regarding our intentions and those of others, as well as the part we play in both.

Our opinions are often based more on emotions than true assessment and usually carry the day. Strong emotions often emerge from efforts to defend our self-serving intentions and beliefs.

For intelligence to matter, it requires personal motivation and openness toward new information, while gathering relevant facts and drawing sensible conclusions. A significant skill of effective living is to periodically put aside our self-serving propensities and reflect on the possibility of our ulterior motives. As a result, we are in a stronger and wiser position to meaningfully participate in interpersonal, domestic and world affairs.

This is nothing to be ashamed of, because we all share in this flaw of humankind. We ignore it, however, at our own peril.

— Gene Harvey, Puyallup