Writer takes issue with other writer’s comments
Mr. Feuilly’s guest column on Tuesday, Aug. 6, simply repeats the same old misinformation he has written before. If he preferred employment that does not pay into Social Security or Medicare, I suggest he should have found employment as a Texas public education teacher.
My sister-in-law was a teacher for more than 40 years and her retirement and medical benefits are less than the ones I receive under Medicare and Social Security. And she paid more into the teacher retirement system than I paid into my federal benefits.
Since Mr. Feuilly apparently never belonged to a union, he should not judge an organization he knows nothing about. Unions are a part of all democratic nations. They suffer with the rest of the national economy and enjoy its benefits, when we all prosper. I wish Mr. Feuilly could have talked to my grandfather who, in 1908, worked in the steel mills of Pittsburgh 12-14 hours a day for just enough money to rent a cold water flat and buy just enough food to survive. When he moved to Oklahoma, he became a charter member of the Southwestern’s Oil Field Workers Union, which fought both corporations and government for the pay and benefits enjoyed throughout non-union America today.
How giving future workers our retirement benefits somehow makes us like “Argentina, Cuba, North Korea, China and Russia,” is beyond understanding.
When he speaks of aiding non-producers by taxed producers, I must assume he includes himself and every other recipient of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, military retirement, teacher retirement and public education, which are the largest federal and state obligations.
I should have known by now that anything President Obama says about any subject, no matter how true, will be an insult to Mr. Feuilly. The exemptions to the Affordable Healthcare Act were approved when that organization’s present health plan equals or exceeds the minimum requirements of the new standard. Unions, corporations and private health plans have been approved for this exemption, which was one of the additions to Obamacare demanded by Republicans in Congress.
Mr. Feuilly’s argument concerning global climate change demonstrates an absolute and complete misunderstanding of the subject. If Mr. Feuilly would read just a little weather science, instead of Fox News and oil/gas/coal company funded publications, which are universally rejected by every major scientific organization in the world, he might make a relevant contribution to the greatest danger to humans since the last great ice age.
His fixation with the failure of Solydra, which represented less than 3 percent of the alternative energy subsidy, completely ignores that Solydra failed because China flooded the world market with solar panels at less than production costs. If it were not for government support for alternative energy in the West, there would now be only one producer of solar panels – China.
Every industrial nation recognizes the tremendous potential market for these panels, especially in the third world. Which have no national power distribution grids and have no possible means to build one.
In my opinion, small-scale electrical production units are the future. Thirty percent of all electricity produced is lost in wire transmission to the users. Small city, or even home production units would hugely expand service, reduce cost and environmental impact. This industry should be judged by science, not politics, it is too important to future generations.
I believe Mr. Feuilly is a concerned citizen, searching for absolutes in a very uncertain world. If he would recognize the contributions of men and women who have spend a lifetime studying the economic, political and science of modern life, I believe he would form some very different conclusions.
Dennis Tilly, Weatherford