Letters for March 19, 2009
Re “Head first” (Bars & Clubs, March 12):
This is a RAD article. I really liked it!
Re “Ban is not in the bag,” (Green, March 5):
Waiting around for the government to ban those ubiquitous plastic shopping bags is pointless when you can do right now what I did a few years ago: Declare a unilateral personal ban on all plastic shopping bag and styrofoam to go container use. For shopping, there’s this stuff called cloth, and some creative folks have sewed it into bag form. If you can acquire some of those “cloth bags,” and get in the habit of taking them to the store with you—takes about a week, and then you’ll feel weird without them, as opposed to with them—you’ll never have to use a plastic shopping bag again. It really works. Don’t worry; you’ll still have a plentitude of plastic bags in your life, like the ones bread loaves come in and such. Save those instead of buying baggies, and recycle the rest. Even so, you’ll have trouble squeezing all the recyclables through the bin hole at the store. And the next time you pass by the plastic bags shamefully flying from every fifth tree in town, or when you see the sea tortoise choking on a plastic bag in that National Geographic photo, you can think, “That wasn’t mine.”
T. Alan Moore
Mining for facts
Re “Mining law changes” (Upfront, March 5):
Dennis Myers reported that mining companies can obtain mineral title for $2.50 per acre. This is incorrect; it’s typically at least $100 per acre. Unpatented mining claims (20.66 acres), providing mineral title, require filing fees of about $205, payable to the federal government and the county. Annual maintenance fees are then required, currently about $135 per claim. Modern mining operations require hundreds of claims and typically exist for at least 15 years, and in many cases more than 25 years. Adding these fees per acre for 15 years amounts to at least $108, not $2.50, an outdated figure used in regards to private patented mining claims, which can no longer be obtained. Further, when considering the number of claim covering major mines, “mineral title” fees typically exceed $500,000 over the mine’s life. Such fees are in addition to the thousands of direct and indirect high-paying jobs and community support these mines and companies contribute to rural Nevada. Then there’s the approximately $100 million in taxes the industry pays annually; you can’t tax a business that, if the RN&R’s view has its way, wouldn’t even exist.
With regards to gold, mining companies don’t net the gold price (now around $900 per ounce), as the “cash” cost to recover that ounce averages about $400 in Nevada. All this is after the millions of dollars in capital it takes to start a mine, such as the nearly $500 million currently being spent to bring one of Nevada’s newest mines to the production stage, with much of this money benefiting Nevada’s economy. On another point raised by the RN&R, yes, some mining companies operating in Nevada are foreign-owned, but only because, unlike other countries like Canada and Australia, which value their mineral resources and promote their extraction as a way of producing wealth, jobs and raw materials, the United States does not. Thus, the vacuum created by a lack of support inside the U.S. attracts foreign businesses, and because few U.S. universities teach mining-related subjects, U.S. mining operations need to rely in many cases on workers from other countries.
Blast from the past
Re “People’s poet” (15 Minutes, Oct. 24, 2002):
I met Mr. Jamerson on the corner of Ogden and Las Vegas Boulevard in downtown Las Vegas in 2006. It is not enough to say just how much of a remarkable gentleman he is. There stands a man of humility who shares his thoughts of wisdom of genuine enlightenment to every passerby he sees. I must say that I am impressed and touched by his wisdom, insight and discernment.
A good face
Re “A Rush of optimsm,” (Know You’re Right,” March 12):
Amanda writes about the so called “left” whining about fairness, while doing nothing but whining herself. All of you Rush “idiotheads” need to wake up to the realization that the Republican Party is DEAD! You have no leadership, no ideas, you’ve run this country into the shitter, and we’ve got to clean up your mess. It must be embarrassing to have Rush, Newt, Sarah, Hannity as your face. Good luck!
Leave Britney alone
Re “Brothers vs. Grimm” (Film, March 12):
Well, look here, someone felt boring and wrote a fantasy story. The Jonas Brothers 3D: Concert Experience is much more than that; I bet you haven’t even seen the movie. Well, if “Jonas siblings warble and whine through their alleged hit list,” I would LOVE to see you do it, guess you wouldn’t sound so much better. So think over and over before you write something about them. “No-talent bastards.” Wow, did you come up with this all by yourself? Don’t think so. So you might think that I’m a crazy Jonas Brothers fan, I am and I can’t stand this kind of text about my favorite singers, so write these kind of reviews to your grandma.
May the best Mormon win
Re “Son of Romney v. Reid” (Upfront, March 5):
As a devout member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the son of a Mormon Bishop, I am looking forward to campaigning for Sen. Harry Reid in 2010, and even more so if the carpet-bagging nuisance known as Mitt Romney ends up being the GOP nominee. And, when one looks at Harry Reid’s religious beliefs, they see that he is very active in church, and actually holds a temple recommend, something that requires one to live in an extremely moral fashion in order to hold. So, this anonymously listed clown on the RN&R website, who apparently isn’t Mormon themselves, obviously doesn’t know much about Mormonism and its long-standing practice of political neutrality, only speaking up on certain occasions (i.e. Prop 8).
Therefore, they should keep their mouth shut instead of spouting ignorance. Also, in respect to this Deusey character, his problem seems to be just like that of the Mormon bloc in the GOP. They seem more interested in “who’s a good Mormon” than they are in who’ll actually represent Nevada better. They’re more interested in engaging in a religious pissing contest than they are in electing the right man or woman for the job. I can’t for the life of me figure out why people think that Mitt Romney would be a good choice to represent Nevada, when it is so crystal-clear obvious that he intends to use Nevada’s senate seat—and hard-working people like you and me who live in Nevada—as a stepping stone toward his own selfish ambitions in 2012. So, that being said, I’m looking forward to the re-election of our Senate majority leader in 2010, and the re-election of our president in 2012.