"200,000 and still growing," huh? Wonder how many of them will get asked to get a business license from the city of Medford and how many won't? — Rob Werfel, Ashland
Do not the curmudgeonly editors find it ironic that the day after their editorial diatribe against bicycle lanes the paper runs an article about the health and environmental benefits of bicycling and walking?
Perhaps the question to be asked is: Why do so many parents feel compelled to drive their kids to Hedrick/Roosevelt? Most students live within two miles of the school, an easy 15-minute bicycle ride. Perhaps it is because there are not enough bicycle lanes in the city yet?
My seventh-grade son rides 2.1 miles to school almost every day. He enjoys it. He is certainly not participating in the obesity crisis. There are bicycle lanes almost all the way. His greatest hazard is getting by Hoover Elementary where parents habitually park — where? — in the bicycle lane. — Jim Bauermeister, Medford
As a cyclist who rode 20 miles back and forth from work, I am quite taken aback by the editorial on Nov. 11.
My commuting route often took me by Hedrick Junior High School. With doors opening into the lane of traffic, children crossing the street, and inattentive drivers pulling out unexpectedly, I was forced to ride in the middle of the street, which was quite dangerous. I was nearly hit several times.
I would like to remind the editorial board that we the citizens have already spoken with our votes and have elected the government officials who made the laws and regulations regarding placement of bicycle lanes in public rights-of-way to encourage safe bicycle commuting in our cities.
I commend the Medford transportation planners for having the foresight to start creating a safe cycling transportation network within Medford. Yes, automobiles far outnumber bicycles in our town. How unfortunate.
Maybe someday Medford residents will tire of traffic jams, air pollution and road rage. When they do, they will be looking for safe bicycling routes and bicycle lanes for commuting, running errands, visiting friends and enjoying fresh air. Thankfully, the city will have them in place for us all to use. — Bob Korfhage, Medford
The celebrated Airbus A380 Superjumbo commercial aircraft is the final operation of a perfectly executed strategic trade policy by European government to take high-paying jobs from the United States to Europe. The A380 is an attempt to drive the Boeing Jumbo 747 out of the sky, thus completing European dominance of the air.
This beggar-thy-neighbor policy went like this: The French and German governments paid the entire cost of Airbus' first commercial aircraft — the A300. And, the Airbus/Eastern Airline deal is a prime example of a strategic trade policy at its best (or worst).
Eastern Airlines needed new airplanes but didn't have the money to buy them. So Airbus helped finance them with $96 million. Moreover, Airbus paid for passenger seats not filled over 170. The A300 has as many as 190 seats. Airbus was underwriting virtually all the risk of running Eastern Airlines.
The competition for this industry was never fair. It was, and is, European taxpayers' subsidy money against an American industry that requires a profit to survive.
The A380 is a gamble with European taxpayer money that I hope fails. — Richard Laquess, Talent