Why are Americans told to go out and buy when most goods are foreign?

Why are Americans told to go out and buy when most goods are foreign?
EDITOR:
We are living in truly amazing times in the respect that we are at war with terrorism and we are instructed by government leaders to go out and buy. During World War II, all citizens were to conserve, recycle, and deprive themselves of many essentials of living by purchasing items with ration books.
Knowing full well that this is a different time and age and lifestyles are very different as well as the differences in the way we wage war, I am still bewildered as to how shopping for the thousands of items made in China and elsewhere is good for the United States.
Merchants selling huge amounts of imports do very well. However, their employees do not fare well when it comes to wages, and most offer no health care or other benefits.
I believe we need to examine how Americans benefit from shifting the manufacturing of almost everything we need for daily life to plants overseas.
I only see loss of decent jobs and people hitting the unemployment line and many times not getting a job after that. Look at parts of inner cities and small towns that are suffering from blight -- just to cite some signs that we are not as well off as our leaders want us to believe.
Somehow, we have to leave all the imports on the shelves, and the message may come out that we don't need them.
JOSEPH P. HILKO
Hermitage
Regardless, county will have to spend on election
EDITOR:
The recent editorial about a new voting system properly identified the need for the board of elections and the county commissioners to work together to find ways to meet our need for voting equipment.
The Vindicator, however, is incorrect when it claims we have not issued a warning stating that we do not have an election system in place for next year's elections.
We have stated on numerous occasions that following our last November election, our short term rental of election equipment would expire and it would be necessary to make decisions about new equipment. Our county-owned equipment was retired last year when it became unreliable.
What I did express to The Vindicator was that we would not be without some means of conducting an election; the question is, what will it be and how much will it cost?
We have been engaged in a three-year project to reduce costs, cut staffing levels and reduce the number of precincts in preparation for moving to a new system. The board believes the best approach is an orderly phase-in of a new system. Electronic voting machines will correct the problems related to paper ballots, many of which were made all too clear by the recent Florida experience.
Those who urge us to stay with paper ballots, either by buying or renting optical scanners, should understand those system may have a lower initial cost, but over the long-term will cost as much as electronic voting machines which have many advantages over paper ballots.
Those who urge us to wait for money from Washington will be in for a disappointment. The legislation that is circulating in Congress will only make money available to replace punch card systems.
It's an unavoidable fact of life the county will have to spend money in 2002 on election equipment of some kind. The question is, will it be money spent toward the future or spent on continuing the problems of the past?
MARK E. MUNROE
Youngstown
X The writer is chairman of the Mahoning County Board of Elections.
Mediators don't impose solutions but help parties reach resolution of issues
EDITOR
As a dispute resolution professional for more than 10 years, I appreciate your endorsement of the Supreme Court of Ohio's order that the parties haggling over education funding mediate a resolution to their on-going squabble ( & quot;How We See It, & quot; Tuesday, Nov. 20). As you suggest, the critical importance of the issue will not bear further delay and previous attempts to break the impasse by the parties themselves have not borne fruit.
I do take exception, however, to your suggestion that the mediator recommend a solution to this thorny problem. Mediation's success derives in part from the manner in which the process allows the participants to generate their own resolution to the issues rather than rely on a third party, however neutral she or he may be. Furthermore, the confidentiality to which parties typically agree before entering mediation prohibits the mediator from disclosing statements made in negotiations (i.e., the basis for any recommendation the mediator might make). Time and again in a variety of settings mediation has proven that some of the most durable solutions are those which are agreed upon not imposed.
Perhaps the reason this dispute remains unresolved is that too many & quot;third parties & quot; have been arguing the worth of their ideas instead of keeping the focus on creating an effective plan. Rather than building the bridge, a good mediator enables the participants to take the bricks out of the wall between them and do the work themselves.
JOHN POLANSKI
Jefferson
X The writer is program coordinator and mediator for the Ashtabula County Joint Court Mediation Project.