TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Hernando Today

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

ADVERTISEMENT

The Tampa Tribune

Published: December 28, 2008

Midwinter Madness

I know this probably won't do any good, but I need to say it anyway.

For several weeks all the media have been reporting the doom and gloom of merchants facing record-low holiday sales volume. Because of both the severe economic downturn and terrible winter weather sales are down, especially in the higher-end commodities such as jewelry, furs, expensive electronics, fashion clothing - in short, things we'd like to have but can do without as we make choices between paying the mortgage, buying food and medicine, and treating each other to the frivolous stuff we shower on ourselves and each other once a year.

But I wonder if the merchants have been looking at this debacle and asking themselves if perhaps they're going about it all wrong? Is it still good business practice (if it ever was) to put so much reliance on one or two months of frenzied advertising and pushing to make the year's profit?

If merchants can afford to knock prices down 50 to 70 percent the day after Christmas, what does that say about pricing those things in the first place?

And what does this say about us, the ones who wait until we're beaten over the head to "buy, buy, buy!" to go out and spend ourselves into a financial hole it will take months to dig out of?

Here's an idea: How about seeing something we think someone would like, buying it for them, wrapping it up in a pretty package, and giving it to them on, say, Aug. 17 or Feb. 9 with a cheery greeting "Thought you'd like this, Happy No Special Occasion Day!" And instead of whacking huge percentages off the prices at the end of the year, how about the merchants just tacking on a little less profit all year long? Wouldn't the result be the same?

And with no more of this "Midwinter madness!"

Gail B. Leatherwood

Spring Hill

Foolish Follies

Of The Auto Industry

With the disgraced Detroit three automakers getting $17.4 billion of our taxpayer dollars in loans, thanks to the disastrous George Bush, we should remember the last several billion that we gave the industry, and the outcome of it. In the 1990s, the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles worked to make 80-plus miles-per-gallon cars and allowed for communications amongst scientists between the Big Three automakers to help speed that process along.

The partnership was a huge success, with three 70-plus mpg prototypes. General Motors had the Precept, a five-seat sedan with ample trunk space, with one version getting 108 mpg. Ford had the Prodig, getting 72 miles per gallon, and Daimler-Chrysler also had a 7 mpg vehicle. Taxpayers were proud that their billions were not wasted and expected these vehicles on the market.

But none of the automakers put any of these vehicles into production. Instead, they chose gas-guzzling SUVs, the epitome of stupidity from a climate change and energy conservation perspective. Using slick ads to push their behemoth vehicles, the automakers are among the biggest culprits in the fast rise in greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

What happened to the efficient vehicles? The failure to incorporate that technology was also a major cause of our economic collapse. With the rise in gas prices this past summer, the value of SUVs plummeted; and for many, their gas guzzlers are now worth less than the loan they have on them.

Why should we give a bailout now, when the automakers are the ones who put themselves into the crisis they are in through their own idiocy? Why don't they dust off these efficient vehicles and put them into production, something both our wallets and our planet could have used a decade ago?

They say those who forget history are bound to repeat it. After the foolish follies of the auto industries, in pushing gas guzzlers on the American public (along with tax breaks that they manipulated through Congress), why should we bail them out?

What we need is a massive investment in mass transit and high-speed passenger rail - a much better way to travel with exponential fuel savings compared to the most efficient vehicles.

Chad Kister

Nelsonville, Ohio

Build Smaller

Why don't the developers build smaller houses, say $120,000 or less? Who knows? They might sell and not get foreclosed on.

You won't get rich as fast, but you'll do a service for the community. Plus, smaller homes won't cost a fortune for utilities and taxes.

G. Long

Brooksville

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT