Opinion: In Tuesday’s Letters to the editor
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
Readers react to the Obama administration’s tough words for the auto industry in Tuesday’s Letters to the editor.
Roger A. Wells, of Manhattan Beach, welcomes limits for Detroit:
It’s sad watching our major automakers slip into history with a tin cup in their hands. Over time, these giant automakers built up costly executive hierarchies and frittered away their competitive advantage to foreign brands that ate their lunch in the U.S. marketplace. Because we taxpayers are stuck in the default position as lenders of last resort, we should clamor to ‘cut ‘em back or cut ‘em off’ and force reevaluation of such layered executive sweeteners as bonuses, hiring inducements and golden parachutes.
But Steven Siry, of Los Angeles, worries that the president is overreaching:
The last time I checked, personnel actions within a private corporation were governed by a board of directors and shareholders. As a General Motors shareholder, I do not appreciate the president dictating the dismissal of GM chief Rick Wagoner. This is a private matter. Just as we have separation of church and state in this country, we also need to honor the tradition of the separation of public and private entities. This is just one more step toward nationalization.
Also, Standard & Poor’s EVP Vickie Tillman takes George Skelton to task for his assessment of California’s lowest-in-the-nation bond rating:
...[C]redit ratings are assessments of creditworthiness -- primarily, the likelihood of default. In general, Standard & Poor’s ratings for municipal debt reflect the relatively strong credit quality of municipal issuers. Although the likelihood that, for example, either Beverly Hills (rated AAA) or Stockton (A+) will default may be low, that does not mean that both municipalities deserve the same rating, nor that neither would ever default. Their credit profiles and economic fundamentals differ. A rating system should reflect these differences to help investors make decisions. Even though the ultimate risk may be small, in our opinion, California is more at risk of default than higher-rated states.
Letters about solar panels in the desert, healthcare reform, and Los Angeles billboards, too.