Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com
...............................................................................................
Trump's 'victory'
Re Trump Scores Victory As Ford Shelves Plans For Mexican Plant (Jan. 4): So Donald Trump gets an early start on building his wall with Mexico, but it turns out to be a figurative wall – a very clever move – and he was right, Mexico will pay for this wall.
Of course, the whole thing could backfire in terms of The Donald's other promises. If jobs are going to come north, the availability of jobs south of the U.S. border is surely going to shrink, creating pressures for desperate people to leave Mexico and head for the United States.
He didn't promise to build a wall with Canada during the campaign. But a figurative wall is a lot easier to erect than the physical variety. Coming to you soon …
Dan Turner, Ottawa
................................
The decision by Ford Motor Co. to cancel a $1.6-billion plant in Mexico is not a "win" for Donald Trump's policies – if we can be so bold as to call them that – and should not be portrayed as such, even if Donald Trump says it is so. It was a recognition by Ford that sales of compact cars are declining and that the existing plant in Hermosillo, Mexico, is sufficient to meet demand for the Escort.
The $700-million investment promised by Ford for Michigan is for the development and production of electric, hybrid and autonomous vehicles. One suspects that these are highly skilled jobs that wouldn't have been suitable for Mexico, Trump or no Trump.
For the past year, the mainstream media – including The Globe and Mail – has fallen into the "Trump Trap" by chasing stories that are, at best, attempts at disinformation from the Trump team and Russia. The mainstream media will have to do a better job of looking behind the headline (or tweet) in an era of falsehoods and propaganda emanating from a White House occupied by Mr. Trump. Otherwise we will find ourselves living under an administration that can manipulate public opinion. With just a tweet.
Lawrence La Fave, Kanata, Ont.
................................
Gifts, obligation
Re Even Small Gifts Can Buy Political Influence (Jan. 3): Arthur Schafer's observations about the psychology of the sense of obligation shed some favourable light on the much-maligned mainstream media.
In late 1978, as publisher and editor of the Canadian journalism review Content, I commissioned the late Val Ross, then a freelancer, later deputy editor of The Globe and Mail's Opinion section, to write about freebies in the media. Ms. Ross's piece remains a definitive essay on how, as she put it: "The classic deflection offered by freebies apologists – 'my personal integrity will prevent me from being compromised by a mere $500 trip or whatever' – simply doesn't wash."
She went deeper, into an area even now unaddressed in the many articles about the Prime Minister's tortured justifications for his cash-for-access stance, writing: "It's human nature that we don't anticipate the guilt or indebtedness we'll feel before we accept gifts and favours. Our failure to make that connection, our capacity to slip into obligations not of our own generating, is half the problem. The rest is our refusal to acknowledge it."
This is one area where even the now-beleaguered mainstream media are, in general, ahead of most politicians and in a rightful position to be critical. Even more digging into the psychology of the sense of obligation is in order.
Barrie Zwicker, Toronto
................................
Much of a oneness
Re Washington Is Now Marching To The Thumps Of The Trump Drum (Jan. 4): Quite the array of cloned old white guys in the front-page picture of Republican members of Congress. Some of them apparently didn't get the memo about red ties. I guess the young girl in row two was a guest: From the look on her face, I suspect she's asking, "Where in heck are the women?" Where indeed!
Ann Sullivan, Peterborough, Ont.
................................
Matter of instinct
Re UBC President 'Regrets' Furlong Speech Decision (Jan 4): There was a time when freedom of enquiry into every area of human thinking – however controversial – was the raison d'être of a university. It would seem this is no longer the instinctive raison d'être at the University of British Columbia.
R. Garth Kidd, London, Ont.
................................
What of the rest?
Re Order Of Canada Inducts 100 Honorees (Dec. 31): Of the 100 honorees, about half came from Ontario (Nunavut was deservedly rewarded with two) but none came from Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, Yukon and the Northwest Territories. That is not a true representation of this great nation. Surely there are outstanding Canadians from these excluded provinces and territories who are worthy of this appointment.
For 2017, Canada's 150th anniversary, Rideau Hall should be encouraged to initiate action to ensure the list includes Canadians from all parts of this country.
Bob Wornell, Dartmouth, N.S.
................................
What CEOs earn
Re Companies Should Fix It, Not Ottawa (Jan. 4): I couldn't agree more with the lead-in to your editorial on CEO compensation where you state that you have "long questioned the various self-serving excuses that justify ever-rising CEO pay: that compensation is always connected to performance, that paying executives with stock options and share grants is an effective way of motivating them, or that share price is an accurate reflection of a CEO's performance."
However, I couldn't disagree more with your solution, which implies companies should fix compensation and that this remedy is to be found in the boardroom. While this might be ideal, as is the idea that all companies should pay workers fairly, it seems to be a contradiction to your acknowledgment that compensation has become an all-too-cosy arrangement with CEOs having "too much influence over who sits on their companies' boards." We leave it to governments to establish minimum wages, why not maximums?
Merran Proctor, Victoria
................................
Rather than absolute numbers, senior executives' pay should be judged by the value added to the company by their efforts. Investors do not begrudge billions earned by Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and other tech geniuses who created giant companies from almost nothing in a few years. The problem is with CEOs who run great enterprises into the ground while pocketing obscene sums and who can't be replaced without paying them a king's ransom.
Sudhir Jain, Calgary
................................
Ah, darn …
Re Assessed Home Values Skyrocket In Vancouver Area (Report on Business, Jan. 4): Does this mean I could have bought the home of Lululemon's founder for $63.9-million in July, 2015, but now would have to pay $75.8-million? Bummerrrrr!
Henry Van Drunen, Stratford, Ont.