Erosion of Infrastructure and Wages

Two provocative pieces stood out in The Times on Aug. 5: the Sunday Report, “The ‘90s: Private Boom Stingy on Public Good,” and “America’s Torrent of Need” by Barbara Ehrenreich (Opinion). The former piece reveals the manner in which the nation’s infrastructure was allowed to decay during the supposedly prosperous ‘90s, whereas previous booms saw enormous undertakings like the interstate highway system and the moon landings. The latter article recounts the plight of underemployed and low-income workers, whose plight grew worse throughout the decade.

The most curious thing about these pieces, viewed together, is the way in which these issues are only now beginning to come to light. I attribute this in large part to the need of the Clinton-friendly media to protect our former president during those years, throughout which the phrase “good economy” was ceaselessly bandied about. Now, certainly the blame for the worsening conditions cited is due mainly to bad leadership in the private sector. However, Bill Clinton did gain considerable mileage in his ’92 election campaign from his “I feel your pain” speech.

I voted for George W. Bush, not because I considered him a miracle worker, but because I knew that, lacking his predecessor’s “sexy” charisma and boyish charm, no slack would be cut for him. And sure enough, these vitally important issues are finally, finally, finally being addressed.

Charles Hoffman

Van Nuys

*

Thank you for your Sunday Report on the state of public works during the economic “boom.” Where was The Times during election times, asking the hard questions of political candidates, instead of judging who might win based on personality traits? Where was The Times investigating potential issues such as the failure of power privatization in California before it reached crisis level?

A “tragedy of the commons” under the leadership of the post-Depression-era generation has been in the making for a long time.

George DuPre

Glendale

*

Your otherwise excellent article on our failure to spend on infrastructure was marred by one weak assertion: “That was the lowest level of any peacetime boom since the 1920s, and if comparable figures were available, some analysts believe they would show it to have been the lowest in a full century.” Some analysts? Which ones? “If comparable figures were available”? But they’re not, so how can these unnamed analysts harbor beliefs about what the figures would show?

Please accept my nit-picking as a compliment. A newspaper that devotes this much space to such important but unglamorous topics as sanitary sewer system capacities deserves a lot of credit, but also raises expectations.

John Gallup

San Diego