Last week on the website we asked you to weigh in on the plan to rename and rebrand part of the Southeast Valley as “The International District” instead of the “War Zone”. 50% of you think the new name is a good idea and will probably do the trick. 28% of you think it won’t work, and 22% are playing the wait and see game. Make sure you vote on this week’s poll, which has to do with the brackish water finds on the west mesa that have been in the headlines recently.
Now for your thoughts and opinions about the show. Here’s a sample of some of the emails we’ve received this week:
I’m watching the Sunday morning repeat of Infocus as I do most Sundays. While I appreciate you at least recognizing there exists a faculty at UNM, why not consider Schmidly’s impact on staff there? As you know, thousands of people are employed by UNM. They are constantly reminded that they just don’t count – in any way. Everyday the staff hears, whether directly or indirectly: “There are thousands of people standing in line for your job. If you don’t like how you are being treated, quit.” There exists a staff union, USUNM. Very few staff have joined. The top two reasons are “How can a union help me when we all know UNM leadership, including staff supervisors, can do whatever it wants?” and “If I join a union, my supervisor will fire me or make my life so miserable at work that I’m forced to quit.” Both responses, of course, indicate staff intimidation and disrespect. Once again, thank you at least recognizing Schmidly’s, the regents’, and New Mexico political leadership’s disrespect and abuse of faculty, but, once again, UNM staff have been slighted – this time by Infocus and KNME. Perhaps staff at KNME are too intimidated to discuss staff abuse on the program?
I am a former staff member at UNM and a current student.
Leslie
While a panel critique of President Obama’s economic stimulus package is entirely fair game, one panel member inaccurately described a component of the package as ‘bee insurance” and no one present corrected her. This sound bite is a right wing spin on what is actually disaster insurance for livestock owners. To characterize it solely as “bee insurance” is either deceptive or ignorant. Furthermore, I would expect at least some members of the public television community to be familiar with the difficulties that beekeepers across the country have had in recent years with blighted bee colonies, a subject that has been dealt with by public television in the not too distant past. Agriculture in this country is in serious jeopardy if bee populations are threatened, and a threat to agriculture is clearly a direct threat to the American economy as a whole. Thus an economic stimulus package that involves disaster insurance for livestock owners–including beekeepers–appears to be a reasonable proposal. Too much of the criticism of the economic stimulus package coming from the political right is based on outright falsehoods or myopia, and it is troubling to see KNME contributing to the confusion rather than providing some needed clarity for viewers.
Sincerely,
Kim Reed-Deemer
Las Vegas, NM
I really liked Teresa’s perspective on the issues you covered this evening. One thing she mentioned was a shovel-ready project to improve Albuquerque’s storm drainage/levy systems. I think it would be worthwhile for the engineering team in charge of this project to look at Los Angeles’s model. At one point the Army Corps of Engineers wanted to build massive concrete storm drains through the city, expanding their current network of concrete storm drains. The project was diverted by one courageous man, Andy Lipkis, from a nonprofit called TreePeople. Los Angeles is similar to Albuquerque in that it gets much of its water from complex, often outdated interstate water allocation agreements. When it rains, it pours and in LA’s case, there is a lot of run-off due to most of the city being paved over. The water picks up all the neighborhood oil spills, car wash soap and other pollutants and races to the ocean. In Albuquerque, the water goes to into the storm drains and runs polluted into the river. Lipkis demonstrated to LA City and County officials that diverting garden cuttings from landfills, tearing up asphalt schoolgrounds for soccer fields, and mulching where possible, would both save money and recharge the aquifer. This would put to use the precious water, which they otherwise have to import across the desert. Here’s the link to TreePeople’s report. I didn’t quite follow one of Teresa’s arguments. Perhaps I heard her wrong. When she mentioned that people needed to spend to stimulate the economy, I thought, how should we spend if we’re already deep in debt? Spend on what? Though I understand many people are suffering, a shrunken economy is a good thing in a country that comprises 5% of the world’s population and consumes 25% of the world’s energy. Economic growth is not all it’s cracked up to be and we need to find other ways to improve our quality of life. Europeans consume half as much as Americans and have a very high quality of life and a higher happiness quota. Their entertainment center isn’t in their livingroom as much as it is on the plaza, piazza, jardins and Stadtzentrum. Spending money and buying “stuff” as a means to happiness is a toxic lie. This is a really good time to spend less, give the environment a break, be resourceful, and recognize our interdependence as communities.
Marita Prandoni
Santa Fe, NM
This entry was posted
on Friday, February 13th, 2009 at 3:56 pm and is filed under nmif.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
