Shoes, socks vs. sound recording

When I read the Rick Caruso representative’s assessment of the Orange Street building they want to tear down to make way for a Nordstrom, I had to chuckle (“History may trip up Nordstrom plan,” March 29).

How classic to claim “it never served any notable use.” As the article points out, it was previously used to assemble display racks, and then was used for almost three decades as a recording studio.

In Caruso’s world, light manufacturing and sound engineering are not notable, but selling socks and shoes is notable?

Scott Peer

Glendale

Taxation as a slippery slope

This is in response to Michael Teahan’s March 27 column, “Tropico Perspective: Prop 13 and making things better.”

The vast majority of homeowners benefitting from Proposition 13 are senior citizens on fixed incomes. In many instances, their homes are the only source of economic leverage that keeps them from being a burden to their children, or possibly one step from homelessness.

Obviously, Mr. Teahan does not seem to grasp the magnitude of this issue. Perhaps it is because he just purchased a new home and bemoans the fact that he has to pay more in property taxes.

I personally think it’s great that he can afford to make a move that many families cannot. Oh, and by the way, the turnover of private residences since 1976 has been so great in California that the percentage of those pre-1976 is not that great.

Teahan is correct when he states that our economy is on life support. The world economy, the housing market and Wall Street all had a hand in this development.

There is another equally important part of this equation. Legislators and government in general, at the federal, state and local levels, are to blame as well, with their irresponsible spending policies. Time after time, they fail miserably at staying within the same zip code of the money they take in versus the money they spend. They have no clue what saving for a rainy day means.

Unfortunately, some of our citizens have fallen into this same pitfall by purchasing homes they could not afford and running up their credit card balances. The government can get around this carelessness by printing more currency, but its constituents do not have this luxury.

I agree with Teahan. Education should be a top priority, and funded accordingly. But in order to meet this obligation, certain other areas must be evaluated and funds allotted based upon their level of importance. I understand that this can be a difficult task, but continually seeking to generate money by taxation is a slippery slope that provides nothing more than a Band-Aid approach.

Santo N. Marino

Glendale