February 1, 2006

Dear Sir,

In response to the letter What of human suffering (January 20, 2006), I would like to plead with the author, Voice of Conscience, to broaden their mind and widen their viewpoint. As human beings, from a vast variety of cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, very different things deeply concern and/or are of interest to us. Such is the rich, interesting tapestry that is the world we live in. There are countless charities in this world which highlight the lack and suffering that exist. Should we focus all our attention on only one of millions of different causes ? all of them needy, and worthy of help? Would this not be suffering from tunnel vision and lack of lateral thinking?

Progress in making this world a much nicer place to live needs to be made by addressing ALL areas of suffering and need ? not just those designated as important by the opinions of a minority. As human beings, it is our duty to convey compassion to all living creatures ? indeed, according to many famous philosophical and intellectual giants over the centuries, it is a measure of our humanity. It is extremely misinformed to accuse those who show their public concern for animals that they don?t also care about human causes. This is very rash, and non-quantifiable.

As a psychology student, I have keenly observed the nature and character of people who have compassion for animals. Invariably, but perhaps not surprisingly, their kindness to animals rarely ends there ? and these individuals can be found volunteering their time to human causes, and, donating money to the same. Voice of Conscience, are you aware of this? In her 26 January 2006 letter titled ?Stop animal abusers before it is too late?, Alisa Mullins has accurately identified a very worrying trend which corroborates my own experience of people. Experts in the fields of psychology and criminology have long known of the strong correlation between animal cruelty and sub-human behaviour inflicted on fellow humans beings.

Voice of Conscience appears to have missed this point entirely and goes on to lament the fact that people spoil their pets while pointing out the suffering of peoples in Africa. Presumably, and following this logic, because of the existence of starving people in the world, those of us who were lucky enough to have been born into this privileged one should live a miserly existence, bear the burden of intolerable guilt, and chose to not enjoy our own lives?

Voice of Conscience, we could all be accused of living less than conscientiously, applying this logic. Can you claim to have never spent money on things not needed for your survival ? that the unfortunate souls in Africa could never afford? Consider this, as but one of countless possible examples: billions are spent annually on new cars by us ?Westerners?. What if everyone bought second-hand vehicles only, and the money that might have been spent on the purchase of new vehicles could be sent to the starving in Africa? Think about it.

Many of us ?root for more than one cause?. Is it wise then to judge those who support causes not as ?worthy? according to one?s mere opinion? Mine is one voice of many for the animals (they cannot speak for themselves). If we genuinely would like to make this world a much nicer place to live, a robust, balanced approach is needed, attacking all the world?s ills, and treating them holistically, especially as many of them (if not most), are inextricably linked. In the amount of time taken to draft your letter, which criticises others, you could instead have utilised your time more positively and productively by taking a cup of tea and lunch out to one of the homeless people in Bermuda.

THUNDER FROM DOWN UNDER

City of Hamilton

February 1, 2006

Dear Sir,

With regard to holding bars legally responsible for people who drink and drive, in my opinion it?s a dangerous path to start down - when you remove responsibility from individuals and place it on other people all you do is start that fine American sport of who?s to blame.

There was an interesting study done in California back in the 1980s. They gave about 20 people the same drink - only some had a tasteless alcohol added and others were drinking non-alchoholic versions. The bartenders serving were licensed, experienced bartenders. The atmosphere was set up to represent a typical bar at happy hour. At the end of the night the results were surprising. People who had consumed no alchohol at all appeared intoxicated and other who had a blood alcohol level high enough to be arrested for intoxication appeared fine. The truth is no one, I don?t care how well trained or experienced they are, can always tell how drunk a person is.

Why should a bartender be responsible for my actions? If I choose to get drunk then it?s my fault and my fault alone. I would hope bartenders and servers would do all they can to stop someone who is clearly drunk from driving, but what would you have them do? Physically take their keys from them? Assault them if they insist on leaving?

Some of the cases I?ve seen in the US and Canada are ridiculous - bartenders held accountable when a drunken patron left the bar in a cab only to come back and retrieve their car later. They get into an accident and somehow the bartender or bar is responsible. It?s past time people were held responsible for their own actions. This notion that I?m not responsible for my own actions, but I am somehow responsible for yours, is ridiculous. Don?t start down that road, Bermuda. It won?t solve any problems if you do.

PAT BROWN

City of Hamilton

January 31, 2006

Dear Sir,

I write to concur with the findings of my colleague and fellow social scientist, Melinda Williams, regarding population growth. My own projections for 2010 show a similar figure (67,800 versus 67,350). Population projections are difficult for a number of reasons, but even more so in Bermuda for two.

Firstly, Bermuda does not have any migration data, a key component in population projections. In most other countries, when a person leaves there are some immigration controls - not so in Bermuda. Here when you leave, and before you enter the plane, you are in fact landed in the US. What is needed is immigration control at the departure points to collect information on leaving, such as if a person is leaving to reside abroad, if they are going away to school, and if so when will they return, what they are studying and so on. (The latter does not strictly fit into migration information but would be helpful for career planning purposes.) While an attempt is made to collect this information via departure, and to some extent, arrival cards, proper border controls will assist in collecting, among other things, migration data.

The other difficulty in projecting population growth is the high number of non-Bermudians who do not age. They come here on work permits and stay for three, six or nine years and then leave and are replaced with even younger persons. So we have the ironic situation in Bermuda that while the population grows, it is actually getting younger. And this will continue as long as our most successful sector, international business, continues to grow at a much faster rate than other sectors.

Just one word about fertility. The total fertility rate in 2000 was 2.4 and, as you pointed out, has been declining. This rate is based on all women who ever had a child. However, when you look at the fertility rate of women in their child-bearing years, the rate is 1. That means that on average, all women between the ages of 15 and 45 in Bermuda, had only one child! (Based on the latest figures from the Registrar General). Demographers are quick to point out that you need about two people (2.2 to be precise) to sustain a population. If this fertility rate continues, Bermuda will rapidly become like its European counterparts where the total fertility rate ranges from one to1.5 children per woman.

What does all this mean? Well, with an expanding economy, both in international business and to some extent in tourism, many of the new jobs created will be filled from persons overseas whom, as I pointed out earlier, will be younger. Of concern, however, is the social impact that an expanding economy will visit on a limited land area. No, we are not the most densely populated place on the planet. But do we really want to become the Hong Kong of the Atlantic? Mr. Editor, some tough and unpopular decisions will have to be made by someone and pretty soon!

CORDELL W. RILEY

City of Hamilton

February 2, 2006

Dear Sir,

Race is a debilitating disease that infects all of Bermudian life. It distracts and divides us and prevents each and every Bermudian from reaching their full potential.

Blacks remember the awesome political and economic power held by ?old white? Bermuda and the economic, educational, political and social exclusion. This is now largely over but we are frozen in time using so much of our time and intellect responding to our past and not spending sufficient time planning for our future together in this ever changing global environment. Race is incidental to the future if equality of education and equality of opportunity are available to all Bermudians.

We are a small country with a troubled past but brilliant prospects for the future. If we let race dominate us, we shall poison our future.

We as Bermudians regardless of our racial origins and the many issues of the past must move on for the sake of future generations.