Readers write for Sunday, June 13

Thank you for the insightful reporting that led to the publication of "In jail for being in debt" (June 6). We often think of people who are incarcerated as deserving their sentences, as paying for what they did. In the case of debt enforcement, people are literally being thrown in jail for the simple fact of not having enough money -- a fact that applies to all too many of us these days.

As a civil-rights attorney, I know that a jail sentence can happen to anyone. All of us do little things, every day, all the time, that technically put us at risk of landing in prison. The difference is in enforcement. Who gets targeted? Who gets caught? This is not a fear with which I want to live. Your article shows us how we often misuse incarceration as a false fix for our shared social problems. We all need to think creatively about alternative solutions to incarceration, especially for those of us who are left vulnerable by economic circumstance.

ELIZABETH LOEB, MINNEAPOLIS

• • •

The misleading headline for this article revealed a bias against creditors and in favor of collection debtors. The "victims" profiled in the story were not jailed for being in debt; they were jailed because they blew off court-ordered appearances. They thought they could blow off a summons with the same ease that they blew off their financial obligations, and then had the nerve to cry when the butcher's bill finally came due.

The sidebar, "What to know: avoiding warrants," left out a couple of fairly obvious suggestions: Don't spend more money than you make and/or save; pay your bills on time, and work with the creditor immediately when you cannot. Seems simple enough to me.

ANNETTE SIMMONS-BROWN, PLYMOUTH

The article states that debtors have committed no crime. Evidently a person who steals a TV from a store is a criminal, but the individual who charges that TV on a credit card and refuses to pay that debt is a good person. Anyone who does not pay for a purchase is stealing and should be treated like any other thief.

DUANE RADTKE, GLENCOE, MINN.

Thank you for Steve Sack's June 6 cartoon, which showed that even Israel's critics can still recognize it doesn't exactly have the world's greatest "peace partner" to tango with. Also thanks for publishing Charles Krauthammer's well-reasoned commentary ("In defense of Israel, because someone must," June 6), which was a good reminder to everyone that self-defense is a human right, too.

BRAD JOHNSON, ST. PAUL

In a June 6 editorial ("Horner needs to disclose client list") the Star Tribune stated that gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner needs to release his client list even though doing so would violate agreements with some of his clients and make him subject to lawsuits. Like it or not, people in the private sector sign agreements with their clients and customers. How different is this from a newspaper using an unnamed source? Does the Star Tribune release it sources if asked? We all know the answer.

HENRY NEWMAN, ST. PAUL

It was interesting to read through Greg Breining's commentary on the pitfalls of living sustainably ("Going green? Good luck ...," June 6). Breining has an amazing knack for excuses. He provides creative reasons not to believe in what are very simple and outright good ideas: eat locally and sustainably, try to conserve water, and buy products with a lower carbon footprint when you can afford it. These excuses are then poorly packaged as inchoate proof that Americans need to be incentivized to live green.

Listen, having more incentives for Americans to keep the Earth healthier would be great. But why make elaborate excuses for what are very simple choices in your day-to-day life? With excuses like his, I would love to hear how Breining's New Year's resolutions are going.

SAM BOESER, MINNEAPOLIS

Thanks for finally giving space to a fact- and reality-based response ("Be not afraid: Government isn't bloated," June 7) to Jason Lewis' long-winded, idiotic rant in the May 30 Opinion Exchange. Only Lewis could claim that the new truly rich are on government payrolls, overtaking Wall Street.