Demographic storm, indeed

Praise and renown to Dale Courtney for his excellent column, “Demographic storm ahead: Labor shortage threatens economy” (Sept. 24, 2024), filled with good data on trends that threaten our economy.

It’s true that our COVID-19 shutdown hurt the economy. The effects will influence the workforce for a long time.

COVID-19 killed some 1.2 million Americans, almost twice as many as the 675,000 who died of the Spanish Flu pandemic. The economic impact of their loss also will be felt down the road. An economic study estimated that intervention saved 866,350 to 1,711,150 lives.

Truly, many of the victims were elderly and therefore not in the workforce. There appears to be no data on how many jobs were permanently vacated by workers whose post-COVID fatigue made it impossible for them to work.

I wasn’t among them, having been long retired before the virus found me in 2023, and major fatigue continues to seriously limit what I can do besides sleep and veg.

As Dale pointed out, severe economic crises lie ahead.

Unfortunately, many businesses require college degrees for work that used to be performed by high school graduates or even by people who didn’t graduate high school. Also, our society underuses community colleges and trade schools.

Dale is spot-on about immigration. We need more, not less as former President Trump blathers.

Yes, we need skilled immigrants, but what happened to “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”?

Our great nation was built on the backs of poor and destitute immigrants. Some arrived in New York with as little as a dollar in their pocket.

We long ago began discriminating against downtrodden would-be immigrants.

Thanks, Dale, for the wakeup call.

Terence L. Day

Pullman

The people will decide

Dorothy Moon (chairperson, Idaho Republican Party) has rightfully condemned the defacing of political signs. Her example is a poster condemning Prop 1. In the same email, she noted that “both the Idaho Republican Party and the Republican National Committee have denounced Rank Choice Voting.”

That is their right, however, Prop 1 was not sponsored by any political party. About 70,000 people (7% of the total registered voters in the state) signed petitions supporting the initiative. So why the Republican anti-Prop 1 signs? If anyone has violated voters’ rights, it is the Republican closed primary with every effort made to close it even more. The closed primary was a key stimulus for the Prop 1 effort and there was a simple way to avoid it. Go back to a fair open primary like we used to have.

The recent actions by Moon and Attorney General Labrador fly in the face of our democratic process. They forced the issue and now the people will decide.

Earl H. Bennett

Genesee

Who supports these guys?

As the November election draws nearer and nearer, I, like many, have seen an increase in the number of mailed pieces promoting our local incumbent politicians, Brandon Mitchell and Daniel Foreman. I was surprised to find a group that was willing to support them. During the primaries, it seemed that many local organizations opposed these candidates, especially Foreman.

Instead of just throwing away the pamphlets, I Googled the provider of the mailing and found that they are, of course, out of state and funded by big money — not Idahoans. I encourage everyone to pay attention to who is supporting the candidates running to represent our district and make sure those candidates’ values align with those that are important to you.

In this district, education is a driver of the economy, backbone of many of our small towns and is a pathway to our future leaders. Foreman voted against every bill that supported public education last session. He only voted “yes” one time for education, and that bill failed and would have put our tax dollars into the pockets of the private schools, which are not held to the same standards as our public schools.

It’s time to vote against Dan Foreman once and for all and send a strong message to the Republican party to put forth candidates that reflect our district, not just their national platform.

Marie Duncan

Moscow

Who do you trust?

The combination of 24-hour news, 50 national broadcasting networks (the big four NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox), 15,445 radio stations, 11,000 daily papers and 7,416 magazines published presents citizens with a virtual tsunami of information. It is hard to know who to trust and not trust.

We are 31 days away from the Nov. 5 election. Polls suggest that most people have made up their mind about who to vote for president. Less than 10% may not have decided who to vote for Harris or Trump. Let me suggest who you should trust.

The 100 former national security and foreign party officials who say that Trump is “unfit to serve again.” Vice President Mike Pence, Attorney General Bill Barr, Chairman of Joint Chiefs retired Mark Milley. These three were some of the chorus of 24 warning about the danger of a second term.

Ten military leaders who say Trump is a “threat to democracy.”

Four hundred economist reject Trump’s tariff solution. The Economist magazine states Trump’s promise to use tariffs would be “disastrous” for Americans. Price increases will not hurt the wealthy but will be passed on to the poor and middle class.

One hundred scientists who have studied the meltdown of the Thwaites Glacier for six years predict a glacier break up in three years that will raise sea level by 10 feet. By 2040, the meltdown of the Greenland glacier may raise sea level by 20-25 feet which will threaten millions living on coastal areas.

Trust them all. None of them will be richer or more powerful but I would respectfully suggest that all are committed based on experience and education to tell the TRUTH.

Stan Smith

Viola

It brought back sad memories

So very sad to read of the service station explosion and fire in Cardiff.

Brought back a lot of memories for me.

I was 14 when our gas station in East Helena, Mont., exploded and burned on Jan. 3, 1966. Likewise, the trucker had been downloading the underground tanks and when it overran the lot and exploded. My mother and stepdad were there. All three got out but she was badly burned and blessedly only lived a week.

My heart goes out to all those around Cardiff who have been touched by this tragedy.

Why this article came to me, only the Lord knows.

Jeanne Warfield

Hemet, Calif.

Rejecting the illusion of lesser-evil voting

The argument for harm reduction voting, choosing the lesser of two evils, has become a familiar refrain in U.S. elections. Proponents argue that avoiding immediate harm justifies supporting candidates who don’t align with our most important values. I once followed this approach, believing it was the best way to prevent greater harm. But I ended up with a president who enables far-right governments and human rights abuses in the name of “alliances.” I won’t be fooled again.

Voting based on morals is not selfish, even when the short-term risks seem high. As someone who faces real dangers under a far-right presidency, I understand the threat. Yet, I consciously choose to vote third party, setting the price of my vote as my principles rather than hoping for salvation in another four years. Our system thrives by convincing us that we have no real choices, stripping away political agency with a false dichotomy. But I refuse to sacrifice my integrity for temporary relief.

By continually voting for the lesser evil, we sustain a political cycle that offers no real opportunity for change. It’s an ethical compromise that prioritizes short-term relief over long-term transformation. Candidates who escape accountability because of their opponent’s flaws can push forward harmful policies with little fear of losing their base.

Real change requires rejecting this cycle. We must stop settling for damage control and start demanding alternatives that reflect genuine progress, not just the illusion of lesser harm. Only by challenging the status quo and reclaiming our agency can we break free from a duopoly designed to perpetuate itself. I won’t settle for anything less.

Beder Bourahmah

Pullman