Metro to public: less service for more money
Re: “Metro board asked to wield knife on services this week,” Jan. 5
Metro’s primary task in these tough economic times should be to cut costs and improve service. Any private sector company would make the effort to provide a better service at a reduced cost, not worse service for more money. Two of Metro’s proposed cuts don’t even make any sense. It has always seemed obvious to me that Metro would save money if it typically ran longer trains, yet the transit agency claims it will save $672,000 by eliminating eight car trains during rush hour. It must be true since Metro says it is so, but how can running three eight-car trains (24 total car trips) cost more than four six-car trains (again 24 total car trips). Same number of cars, same capacity, same amount of electricity to move the trains, but one less operator to pay. Let’s look at the supposed $90,000 saving on the Red Line by “widening rush-hour” using 12 trains per hour in each direction. Running six-car trains five minutes apart in both directions equals 144 cars. Running eight-car trains six minutes apart equals 160 cars, an increase in service with a reduction in labor costs If Metro really wants to reduce expenses, it would be better to reduce the cost of electricity by increasing supply with new natural gas, coal, or nuclear power plants or better yet all three. It is absurd to suppose that one can power a fully loaded eight-car rush hour train with some windmill on a mountaintop in West Virginia. But our local politicians are making electricity cost as much as possible, which makes driving a gas-powered car not such a bad deal compared to Metro.
John P. Hughes
Germantown
What exactly do World Bankers do all day?
Re:” “it’s a wonderful life working for the government,” Dec. 30
Michael Barone is right that working for the U.S. government is a wonderful life, free of worries about job security. Life is no worse in the international public sector. For example, the World Bank (an organization two blocks away from the White House and financially supported by U.S. taxpayers) has so much money to waste that it has even placed condom dispensers in men’s and women’s restrooms even though as an ideological message of how to fight poverty in the Third World, the “condom solution” has miserably failed. The presence of condom dispensers also raises the question of how World Bankers spend their days at the office.
Grace Mangano
Washington
Hume’s remarks tarnished all journalists
Re: “Freedom of religion includes the freedom to discuss it,” Jan. 6
As a student of journalism, I am convinced that Mark Hemingway missed the point of the controversy surrounding Brit Hume’s comments. Mr. Hume has been a respected newsman for over 40 years. While he is no longer a journalist employed by Fox News, he carries with him a weight that only a 40-year newsman can. His word, although not one of an expert on economics, terrorism, or theology, is of someone who has committed his life to reporting facts to an inquisitive and skeptical public. So when Hume takes a position as divisive as he did, he does a disservice to the public by further tarnishing the reputation of all journalists. Journalists used to be hailed as heroes, but are now derided by a public that chooses to get information from partisan sources that legitimize, but don’t challenge, their preconceived ideals. Brit Hume put another nail in journalism’s coffin.
Michael Fallik
Alexandria
