Letters to the editor for Thursday, Feb. 19

Last Sunday the Star Tribune had a one-page analysis regarding "The stimulus plan: Who gets what."

Assuming money doesn't grow on trees, will the paper also be publishing an analysis of "The stimulus plan: Who pays what, when, how?"

DOUG DAGGETT, MINNEAPOLIS

No more giveaways for Wall Street at taxpayers' expense. If banks made bad investments, then shareholders and executives need to face the consequences before any taxpayer money is put on the line.

Experts agree on the key principles. Prominent economists, including Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz (both winners of the Nobel Prize), Nouriel Roubini, Dean Baker and Jeffrey Sachs, all agree that the government must get a fair bargain for any money it invests in the banks, even if that means temporarily taking over insolvent banks. Even conservative Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., admitted this.

If taxpayers' money is being risked, then taxpayers should get any potential profits. If taxpayers are going to risk their money to help banks get back on their feet, then we should get equity just like other shareholders, and we should get the reward once they're back to profitability.

LES STERN, OAKDALE

To advocate silencing -- on a university campus -- the artists who perform in the name of human dignity due to their country of origin is an absurdity. I wonder if these champions of boycott would advocate the same for the Bolshoi Ballet in response to Vladimir Putin's autocratic tendencies?

MORT RYWECK, MINNEAPOLIS;

executive director emeritus,

Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas

The bailout that gives massive amounts of our money to automakers is founded on a very shaky premise: that in the next six months or so, people are going to have the ability and inclination to resume buying new cars.

CAROLE WALKER, MINNEAPOLIS

Did I read correctly? An Eagan principal could be fired for having a kindergartner remove paper towels from a toilet (front page, Feb. 17)? To top it off, if the principal isn't fired, the family threatens legal action? The family is upset they weren't notified? Give me a break.

The toilet appeared to contain only water and paper towels. The intent was to remove the paper towels, not be a punishment.

The family would have liked the custodian to do the job? What about personal responsibility for one's action (6-year-olds included). I'm thinking a toilet is probably cleaner than a lot of surfaces in the classroom -- and if not, a simple hand washing would have taken care of germs, not to mention the fact that a 6-year-old's hands are into a lot worse than a toilet. My question is why was the principal called in the first place -- problem child?

KATIE SCARFONE, NORTH OAKS

The parents of the 6-year-old who accidentally clogged the toilet (at Rahn Elementary School in Eagan) have a right to want to see the principal disciplined for making the boy remove the paper towels from the toilet by hand. What a mean-spirited thing to do to an innocent child.

But I'm surprised no one has mentioned the boy's classroom teacher and her role in this. Why did she have to make such a stink of the situation by calling the principal?

Why didn't she simply reassure the boy that it was OK, and then reach in herself and pull out the paper towels?

Was she so helpless that she had to draw negative attention to the boy by calling in the principal when she could have quietly and efficiently handled the situation herself? Good grief.