Inbox

10 Ways to Change the World

Your article “Africa, Business Destination” was a welcome recognition of the importance of trade and business development as tools for combating poverty [March 23]. But I have to correct a suggestion in the piece that Bono and Bob Geldof seek to represent Africans in their work as activists. They work in partnership with leading Africans but never suggest they represent Africans. Bono and Geldof represent themselves and others who want to see the world’s richest governments keep the commitments they have made to Africa. These two have also argued that trade and investment will be more important than aid. But while business grows, African leaders at the International Monetary Fund conference in Tanzania in March made clear that development assistance is still needed too, for now. Kathy McKiernan, Global Communications Director, One WASHINGTON

When the secretary in the photo-illustration for Barbara Kiviat’s insightful article on jobs says, “I invested in my work skills,” she hits the key right on the typewriter. Knowledge and skills–the stuff jobs are made of, no matter the economy–are our most valuable assets. Kiviat’s article reminds us all to keep our knowledge current and our skills marketable for our jobs of both today and tomorrow. Dustin Weiderman, ROCHESTER, N.Y.

You correctly identify organic cotton as problematic in your article on ecological intelligence but fail to suggest the clear alternative: industrial (nondrug) hemp. The crop, which can be used as an alternative to cotton as well as a base for fuels and plastics, can grow with rainwater and requires no pesticides. The fact that the U.S., unlike most industrialized nations, continues to prohibit hemp deserves some serious attention in these dire times. Tim Mensching, ASTORIA, N.Y.

I am surprised that among the 10 Ideas Time cites, there was no mention of the most important one, the one that has most captivated and driven the younger generation: the belief that we can all make a difference. Revitalizing suburbs and building biobanks are great ideas, but none will be executed if our future leaders don’t believe these projects will benefit anyone. Rick Say, WEST CHESTER, PA.

That’s Old News, Newt

I just had to shake my head at Newt Gingrich’s article [March 23]. In President Barack Obama’s two months in office, Gingrich says, he “has so far failed to turn around the economic decline.” It took the Republicans eight years to get us into this mess with their nonexistent oversight of financial companies and their allowing the deficit to balloon to $10 trillion. In the end, all Gingrich can offer as an answer is Contract with America 2.0–which consists mostly of tax cuts. It’s the old trickle-down economics with a fresh paint job. I’d much rather have tax-and-spend Democrats than borrow-and-spend Republicans. David Ingram, ST. LOUIS, MO.

To claim continually that cutting capital-gains taxes will help ordinary Americans is either disingenuous or an outright lie. The vast majority of these taxes are paid by the superwealthy, and cutting these taxes will help only them. Daren Perlstein LA CAÑADA FLINTRIDGE, CALIF.

Former history professor Gingrich misstates some facts about the 20th century. The Great Depression did not give rise to Nazism or Japanese militarism. It was World War I and its aftermath that set the stage for both Mussolini’s march on Rome and Hitler’s attempted putsch in Munich. By the time of the Depression, in 1929, the fascists had been in power for years, and the Nazis had been growing in strength for most of the decade. Furthermore, Gingrich’s description of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff seems to imply it was part of F.D.R.’s New Deal. Smoot and Hawley were Republicans, and the act that bears their names was passed in 1930, during the Hoover Administration. If Gingrich can’t get his facts straight about the last century, why should we listen to his suggestions for this one? Lee Poole, PHOENIX

Please recycle this magazine and remove inserts or samples before recycling