More work for less money; a one-state solution in the Mideast; movie pirates

A stand against greed

Re “Productivity is up, workers worn down,” Dec. 20

Greed, not need, eliminates most raises, even in this tough economy. Take the sporting goods company cited in the article that laid off two of its 22 employees, squeezing 20% more work from those left. The company’s chief financial officer says that when the economy picks up, employees may get raises. No raises now.

What would a $1 raise for 20 employees cost? There are 2,080 regular work hours in a year, so the raises would cost the company $41,600. So why not? Because the owners get $41,600 less. Does anyone believe that owners with a staff of 20, plus executives, can’t afford that?

People with very high incomes have to work very hard. People with average incomes or smaller shouldn’t be overworked and still not get better pay. Will employers make us a nation of over-stressed, underpaid people with neglected personal lives? I’m an employer, and I won’t.

Ira Spiro
Los Angeles

I’d be willing to wager that nowhere in this city are the things you cite -- long workdays, high stress levels, disrupted family lives, exhaustion and high rates of depression -- greater than at The Times itself. It’s disingenuous to write about this subject without including yourselves among the worst offenders. You are carriers of this disease as surely as those you report on.

My heart goes out to the few hundred employees remaining at this once proud newspaper.

Art Kradin
Valley Village

L.A.’s priorities

Re “L.A.’s hands not on deck,” Dec. 19

I am not so worried about the employee retirement program that will reduce the city of Los Angeles’ civilian workforce at least 9%. It all boils down to priorities. In order of importance:

1. Tax cuts.

2. Tax cuts.

3. Tax cuts . . .

26. Tax cuts.

27. Make sure the city can be a reasonable place to live.

There is always fat and waste to cut.

Pat Mauer
Pasadena

Crack down on pushy salesmen

Re “Salesman arrested in sexual assault, home-invasion robbery,” Dec. 19

We too have been targeted by these aggressive door-to-door magazine salesmen. I have asked the police to not allow them to solicit, but I was told law enforcement cannot legally stop them.

Maybe now that a woman has been attacked in her own home, the City Council can pass legislation to stop this dangerous intrusion. Where are our rights?

Linda Bowling
Studio City

Multiple views of one-state solution

Re “Many steps to one state,” Opinion, Dec. 20

This is the first time I have seen an alternative to the two-state solution presented in the mainstream American media.

As a Palestinian, I believe a two-state solution is inherently unjust because it implies that the majority of Palestinian refugees who were forced out of their homes in 1948 and again in 1967 would not be allowed to return. Meanwhile, European and American Jews will be allowed to move to and settle into the land that was formerly inhabited by Palestinians.

A one-state solution is clearly the only solution that would be just.

I hope to see further discussions of a one-state solution in future articles.

Ramzi El-khater
San Diego

Thank you for publishing the comments by Jonathan Kuttab on a future one-state solution for Israel/Palestine.

Kuttab’s solution is supremely reasonable, and anyone who knows educated Palestinians knows that it is possible -- and may well be inevitable.

Who thought that South Africa could have reached the place it occupies today? Israelis and Palestinians have more in common than black and white South Africans have. They are both “children of Abraham” and seek the same goals -- a peaceful existence in the land of their fathers (and mothers).

Thank you again for allowing this debate to begin.

Courtney Carter
Frederick, Md.

Kuttab writes: “Zionism will ultimately need to redefine its goals and aspirations, this time without ignoring or seeking to dispossess the indigenous Palestinian population.”

But the Zionist movement’s objective was the reestablishment of the nation-state of the Jewish people in the land of its origin. It did not plan to expel the Arabs. On the contrary, it accepted the United Nations partition in 1947, which means it accepted the right of the Palestinians to political self-determination and statehood. The Arabs rejected the United Nations plan, started a war and brought disaster on their people.

After it became clear that Israel could not be destroyed by military means, here comes a different way to reach the same objective: the one-state solution. That is why those who support that solution are known as strong opponents of Israel. Even the extreme left in Israel opposes the idea.

Jacob Amir
Jerusalem, Israel

Kuttab’s article about drawing up plans for safeguarding the rights of a future Jewish minority in Israel, subject to a Palestinian majority, would be laughable were the topic not so serious.

As he is well aware, the Palestinian majority in the West Bank (the Palestinian Authority) persecutes the Palestinian minority there (Hamas supporters), just as the Palestinian majority in Gaza (Hamas) persecutes the Palestinian minority there (supporters of the Palestinian Authority).

And the true Palestinian minority -- Christian Arabs -- are treated even more abominably. Yet Kuttab is peddling the fantasy that Jews will be allowed to live peacefully, with full rights, should there one day be an Arab majority in Israel.

Jeff Kandel
Los Angeles

Troubled by mild reaction to Nazis

Re “Neo-Nazis protest at Riverside synagogue,” Dec. 20

How naive are the people of Riverside -- have they all forgotten? Why is their reaction to a neo-Nazi protest at a local synagogue so mild?

When I was in college ROTC in the 1960s, a troublemaking student showed up on the parade grounds with a Nazi armband. A regular Army officer who was part of the ROTC program and had fought in World War II almost killed him. We were then reminded that Nazis were the enemy of the free world, killing Americans, French and English along with their liquidation of the Jews of Europe.

Maybe the people of Riverside, including the seemingly unconcerned members of Temple Beth El, should wake up. The solidarity of local church members with the synagogue is fine, but don’t forget: Hitler’s movement started with small groups of people in beer halls.

The mild tone of the response to Nazis in our midst -- in Riverside and in your article -- is of concern.

Michael H. Miller
Los Angeles

Fighting piracy

Re “Pirates among us,” editorial, Dec. 19

The feds are going to spend $30 million for additional FBI agents and federal prosecutors to combat piracy. Am I the only one who finds this insane?

Granted, $30 million is a fraction of the current deficit, but with the public option taking a beating because of its costs, why are our tax dollars going to help the entertainment industry (which I’ve read is reaping record profits this year)?

If the industry wants to avail itself of the federal infrastructure to assist with curbing piracy, then let it pony up the $30 million. I’m so tired of taking the money of the many to support the revenue streams of the few.

Hank Lee
Santa Clarita

Church of Yoga?

Re “Going to the mat over yoga tax,” Dec. 18

Yoga enthusiasts in Missouri are upset over a state tax levy on their pursuit, maintaining it to be “a spiritual practice.”

To avoid the tax, yoga practitioners should follow in the footsteps of L. Ron Hubbard, who gave us the science-fiction philosophy of Dianetics. When this practice was subject to taxation, it was converted to the “Church of Scientology,” so as to be tax-free.

I think the “Church of Yoga” has a nice ring to it.

Shelley Martin
San Pedro

A left-out label

Re “News about the news,” Opinion, Dec. 19

Tim Rutten writes that Fox News is “right-wing” yet MSNBC is “progressive.” If one is “right-wing,” isn’t the other “left-wing”? Or better yet, how about “conservative” and “liberal”? Words matter.

How about giving the pretense of at least trying to be fair-minded?

Andrew Bressler
Culver City