Share
In response to “MetLife to bring 2,600 jobs to Charlotte, Cary by 2015” (March 8):
If you give to MetLife, the Panthers deserve the same
I don’t understand the difference between asking the city and state to help upgrade the stadium and the tax incentives MetLife is getting for bringing “x” number of jobs to Charlotte/Cary.
The Panthers create more impact on the local economy than MetLife will for Charlotte, or even North Carolina. Anything MetLife does produce will be erased due to tax incentives.
Many people say let those who attend games or own PSLs pay for improvements. Well, the same should be said of MetLife. No matter how you present it, it’s corporate welfare.
If you’re not willing to help the Panthers, there should be no help for MetLife.
Richard Gerald
Charlotte
In response to “City told to redirect money for stadium” (March 7):
Plan offered by lawmakers is fair, makes economic sense
I want to commend N.C. legislators Becky Carney, Ruth Samuelson, Beverly Earle and Bill Brawley for introducing legislation that would permit part of the present 1 percent tax on prepared foods to go toward upgrading the Panthers stadium.
I think most people support helping the Panthers, while at the same time oppose an additional 1 percent tax on prepared foods.
The present tax that benefits the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority has become a “cash cow,” and it’s time to spread that around. The proposed legislation is the common sense and logical way to go.
Jim Beatty
Charlotte
In response to “Panthers profits high in report” (March 8):
Don’t spend on stadium; no guarantee team will stay
Remember when Jerry Richardson got the franchise to bring football to Charlotte? He thanked citizens, taxpayers, fans, the entire state.
Now, we hear money, money, money or we might lose, lose, lose the Panthers!
Why the renovations now? If new owners take over, we can’t stop them from selling the franchise. If someone wants to make an offer to buy the Panthers, we can’t stop that either.
These are hard times; we should keep the money.
Richard Lynch
Charlotte
In response to “Charlotte airport authority vote delayed a week” (March 7) and related articles:
Charlotte taxpayers should fight for city to retain airport
Charlotte taxpayers built Charlotte Douglas International Airport, you’re good stewards of this $2 billion asset, and you’re highly vested in it.
This airport takeover should incense people regardless of political leaning because it is neither right, nor just.
If this were private property, the state would have to pay for it.
If they can seize the airport, what will be next? Your transit system? Your utility system?
Municipalities exist at the mercy of the N.C. General Assembly. But that does not make this seizure right.
So, Charlotte citizens, contact your legislators and tell them so.
J.L. Kiser
Gastonia
In response to “TSA to allow small knives, sporting gear on planes” (March 6):
Allowing small knives bad for airlines, passengers, business
I believe that any sort of dangerous devices should not be allowed on planes.
The safety and care of passengers and flight attendants is a responsibility of any airline.
If people are allowed to bring these potential weapons on planes, passengers would not feel safe.
Passengers would stop using those airways and the airways would soon go out of business.
The banning of these items would not only benefit passengers and flight attendants, but the airlines as well.
Emily Shinn
Charlotte
In response to “It’s time to get real on sequester; start in D.C.” (March 8 Forum):
Clear out Congress and start over; 1 term should be enough
I, too, believe elected officials in Washington, D.C., should be the first to get a pay cut.
How can they spend millions on travel and waste time talking and never saying anything – when they should be looking into fixing this busted government?
How can they suggest cutting Medicare and veterans’ benefits without a guilty conscience?
I have said for years that we should clean out Washington and start over.
One term should tell us what those who were elected had in mind.
Kathryn G. Yarbro
Lincolnton
In response to “Taco Bell, Icelandic pies drawn into scandal over horse meat” (March 2) and related articles:
Pet horses or eat them? Ponder vegetarian options instead
I marvel at our hypocrisy of rejecting the notion of horse or dog meat on our dinner plates, while condemning cows, pigs and chickens to the same fate.
Obviously, we have established special relationships with horses and dogs as companions, protectors and sports protagonists, rather than as food.
But where is the ethical and logical distinction given that all these animals experience the same feelings of joy, affection, sadness and fear that we do?
Fortunately, our health food industry has spared us from having to choose which animals to pet and which ones to eat. Their delicious soy and grain-based meat alternatives are available in every supermarket.
Cedric Balder
Charlotte
