To the editor: In its wishes for 2015, The Times suggested that we should decrease gasoline prices to help consumers or increase them to provide incentives for developing cleaner fuels. The Times wished we could do both. ("Our wishes for 2015," Editorial, Jan. 1)
This isn't such a silly notion.
Through fees levied on carbon emitters at the source (oil fields, coal mines and so on, as well as a fee for incoming carbon emitters) and dividends shared regularly with consumers, it is possible to have the best of both and work toward the health of our planet as well. All revenue (minus minimal administrative costs) collected from the fees would be returned to the public as dividends to protect households from rising costs associated with carbon fees while encouraging folks to use alternative sources of energy.
Frivolous as you may have thought it sounded, dear editors, the best is possible. Let's make 2015 the year we really get serious about reversing global warming. Passing a carbon fee and dividend is a great way to start.
Margaret Davis, La Verne
To the editor: When looking close to home, the editorial board noted that Hollywood laughed off its 2014 request for "a superhero movie in which a woman stars rather than appearing as a love interest."
So one of this year's wishes asks Hollywood to "realize that not every movie has to be a sequel, a prequel or a knockoff."
Why doesn't the editorial board actually wish for Hollywood to make more movies in California instead of just using our locale as the place where it counts its money?
Phil Ayling, Hacienda Heights
Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion