To the Editor:
Re “Florida Re-edits a New Topic: Social Research” (entrance web page, March 17):
Gov. Ron DeSantis’s push to eradicate ugly truths from our historical past, whereas pretending to guard younger minds, is deceitful, cynical and manipulative, and can in truth hurt younger hearts and minds.
It should promote using denial, false narratives and different poorly adaptive coping mechanisms that may handicap youths as they face their futures.
Life is painful. That may be a elementary reality of our existence. It’s only by inspecting a real and correct historical past of our faults and errors that youths can develop into geared up to make use of solely the healthiest coping abilities.
Paul Rosenberg
Palm Seaside, Fla.
The author is a retired psychiatrist.
To the Editor:
Assaults on college curriculums emanating from Gov. Ron DeSantis and presently targeted on social research underscore the hazard of such campaigns.
Financial intimidation results in self-censorship, and a few publishers in addition to legislators are complicit in distorting or obscuring the historic file. It’s a risk to schooling, and it reeks of hypocrisy.
Starting as a adverse response to political correctness, so-called anti-woke has come full circle to embody its personal alarming type of P.C.
Diane Willen
Catonsville, Md.
The author is professor emerita of historical past at Georgia State College.
To the Editor:
Now we have a brand new method to promote books:
Banned in Florida.
Peter Bolton
Springfield, N.J.
Credit score Card Reward Packages: Winners and Losers
To the Editor:
Re “Credit score Card Factors Are Being Paid For by the Poor,” by Chenzi Xu and Jeffrey Reppucci (Opinion visitor essay, March 6):
It isn’t solely the rich who profit from bank card rewards. The overwhelming majority (77 %) of lower-income cardholders have a rewards card, they usually use rewards for all the things from money again on the grocery retailer to miles for household holidays.
Retailers that settle for bank cards additionally profit via elevated gross sales and safety, decreased danger of fraud, and the lowered value of dealing with money and on-line funds.
Ms. Xu and Mr. Reppucci argue that the prices retailers pay to just accept bank cards cause them to increase costs, however their view isn’t supported by the proof. After Congress capped service provider debit card charges, the Richmond Fed discovered that almost all retailers didn’t decrease costs, and researchers from Georgetown and the College of Pennsylvania discovered that capping the charges seemingly made shoppers worse off by rising account charges and decreasing debit card rewards.
These outcomes ought to come as no shock on condition that the advantages retailers obtain from accepting bank cards simply outweigh the prices.
Rob Nichols
Washington
The author is president and C.E.O. of the American Bankers Affiliation.
To the Editor:
Chenzi Xu and Jeffrey Reppucci are appropriate once they level out that bank card perks favor the well-to-do and prospects who select to pay with money are penalized, notably if the bank card charges the service provider is charged are baked into the pricing and all prospects pay the identical no matter whether or not they select to pay with money or credit score.
Fuel stations have lengthy addressed this discrepancy by charging one value for money and a barely increased one (normally about 10 cents extra per gallon) for credit score.
Just lately some retailers have begun introducing this twin pricing strategy: Clients who decide to pay with money get a reduction (usually between 2.5 and 4 % of the invoice, relying on the scale and sort of enterprise), or those that select to pay with credit score have the proportion added to their invoice.
This switch of prices from the service provider and the cash-paying buyer to the credit-paying buyer pretty locations the bank card value with the first beneficiary of the cardboard’s reward packages. The bank card person additionally advantages from the comfort of not having to hold money (or a checkbook) when buying and a year-end file of purchases made.
Eli Sadownick
Manchester Township, N.J.
To the Editor:
I’ve a bank card that offers me reward factors for meals buying. One other offers me factors for utilizing a significant retailer from which I buy requirements ceaselessly. I exploit the factors I get again to assist defray sudden bills (equivalent to a automotive restore). I don’t stay in resorts, fly firstclass or store at Saks. In impact, the factors I earn enhance my earnings.
Chenzi Xu and Jeffrey Reppucci could also be appropriate that the worth of products will increase as level packages proliferate, but there may additionally be many middle-class Individuals with bank cards like mine who get monetary savings thanks to those level schemes.
I oppose the Credit score Card Competitors Act, which seeks to advertise competitors amongst bank card corporations and decrease the interchange charges (I additionally assume it’s unlikely to move this Congress). However I might be circled if it might be demonstrated that middle-class Individuals like me would save extra money.
Aryeh Raucher
Ann Arbor, Mich.
Drilling for Oil in Alaska
To the Editor:
Re “Left With Few Choices, Biden Freely Approves Alaska Drilling Undertaking” (information article, March 14):
The Biden administration and fossil gasoline corporations that wish to drill for oil in Alaska’s Arctic wilderness overlook an essential consideration: It makes no financial sense.
As civilization makes use of up increasingly of the simply accessible oil reserves on the planet, we have now to make use of costlier and inefficient strategies to extract fossil fuels. Already, numerous fossil gasoline developments have been deserted as a result of the monetary, reputational and authorized prices of those initiatives outweigh their potential revenue.
On the identical time, photo voltaic and different clear power prices have dropped precipitously, making them low cost and accessible to most everybody. Add to that the environmental and local weather hurt, and it’s like arguing that smoking cigarettes is cheaper and higher on your well being than respiratory clear air. We aren’t shopping for it.
To the Editor:
Re “It’s Value Braying About” (Science Instances, March 14):
Thanks and kudos on your article concerning the donkey. An unequivocal sure!
A number of years in the past, I labored actually shoulder to shoulder with a donkey, planting timber to halt the erosion in a deforested space in Brazil. He carried the seedlings; I planted. He obligingly stopped each few toes so I may retrieve them. He was mild, intuitive and accommodating, understanding when to halt.
I’ve all the time appreciated donkeys for his or her individuality, work ethic and musculature. This expertise sealed my respect and admiration.
Paula Armbruster
New Haven, Conn.