Readers Write (Jan. 28): Minnesota Orchestra's Roderick Cox, the Trump presidency, hunting and fishing ammunition, 'The Mary Tyler Moore Show'

During last weekend's massive political mourning, a celebration reminiscent of the 2008 election occurred at Orchestra Hall. Associate conductor Roderick Cox made his Minnesota Orchestra subscription concert debut to exuberant, diverse audiences. (Review: "Roderick Cox nails his first big concert," Jan. 21.)

Like our former president, Cox is tall, black, intelligent, gifted and charming. His long, graceful arms wrung every inch of talent out of our beloved orchestra. Cox and his friend, piano soloist Joyce Yang, attracted new faces to the hall. I sat next to a distinguished gentleman who beamed with pride watching the orchestra's choice as associate conductor.

The evening's most touching moment for me happened when Cox fielded audience questions during a preconcert discussion. He looked over a sea of raised adult hands and called on a young girl. Cox clearly understands that the survival of the arts is dependent on successive generations of engaged and inspired children.

I hope Cox falls in love with Minnesota as much as we have fallen in love with him.

On Thursday, President Trump proposed a 20 percent tax on imports from Mexico, saying it would pay for his wall. This was met with so much outrage that he quickly backed off. Why the outrage? Because that tax would be paid by American workers buying Mexican goods; we would be paying for the wall. And because if the cost of those Mexican goods just went up 20 percent, many of us would simply not be able to afford them anymore.

This points out a basic misunderstanding of trade deficits. Most foreign workers are paid much less than we are. They go to work all day making goods they are too poor to buy themselves. They have to sell them to us. We American workers, with much higher pay levels, cannot only afford to buy most of the goods we make ourselves, but also get the advantage of buying lots of stuff, at low prices, made by poorer workers elsewhere. We buy the car or dress or child's toy because we want them, and we get to buy them at good low prices.

You can cut off all those foreign goods and decrease our trade deficits with taxes or other means, but that just means all us hardworking Americans have to pay more for the goods we want. Maybe some of those goods will later be manufactured in the U.S., but because we are paid so much more, they will still be more expensive. A few people might get jobs (or more likely, a few robots will), but all of us will suffer because so many of the things we want and need will cost more.

• • •

Perhaps we could impose a more reasonable import tax than 20 percent on Mexico and pay for the wall over some years, say 5 to 10 percent. This might even help our farmers, especially organic farmers, compete with those cheap imported vegetable and fruit prices and sell their produce more profitably locally.

We can afford 5 to 10 percent increases in those relatively cheap nonorganic produce prices. We can also afford 5 to 10 percent higher prices on autos and machinery that our corporations chose to produce so cheaply in Mexico. It could help Mexico buy more American goods to balance off our negative $49 billion Mexico trade imbalance, unless they unwisely impose a retaliatory tax that only hurts their citizens.

Mexico should be content with us paying for the wall that will allow the enforcement of our current laws, reduce drug traffic and gun trade, reduce criminal activity, and encourage more efforts to establish citizenship.

• • •

• • •

I find it ironic that Trump refers to a proposed barrier between the U.S. and Mexico as a "big beautiful wall." Beautiful? Doesn't he know that "something there is that doesn't love a wall, that wants it down"? ("Mending Wall" by Robert Frost.)

Cal Brink's Jan. 27 commentary "Obama administration's parting shot at hunters was gratuitous," was intended to deceive. What other conclusion can one make when Brink refers to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Order 219, titled "Use of Nontoxic Ammunition and Fishing Tackle," then calls it a ban on "traditional ammunition." Nowhere in his piece did he use the word "lead," as in lead ammunition.

Order 219 is for the "use of nontoxic ammunition and fishing tackle to the fullest extent practicable for all activities" in our national parks, wildlife refuges and other public hunting areas under the management of the federal government. And the order gives the Fish and Wildlife Service five years to implement it, meaning it affects no one until 2022 (https://www.fws.gov/policy/do219.html). And this order doesn't affect, at all, hunting on private property or state hunting areas, like the Mille Lacs Wildlife Management Area.

We know how harmful lead is on living things. It causes permanent, irreversible brain damage and damage to every other organ in the body. Even a speck of lead from a hunter's bullet ingested by a bald eagle will prove fatal. Lead leaches into the ground and the water, polluting them. As such, we already outlaw lead for hunting ducks and geese. Yes, it is the cheapest ammunition available, but considering the cost of a hunting trip — transportation, lodging, meals, equipment and licensing — the additional cost of about $2.50 a round seems like a small price to pay for preserving the habitat our wild game depend on in the national areas we hold dear.

President Obama didn't take anyone's guns — especially not hunting rifles. So, apparently, in a parting shot, some hunters had to find a way to justify their eight-year hatred.

Mary Tyler Moore was an excellent actress, we all enjoyed her work, and she was very kind to us Minnesotans. But, hello — the accomplishments and advances made for women were made by her character, Mary Richards. The actress Mary Tyler Moore was married to Grant Tinker, producer of the show — she was hardly the single career woman we watched on "The Mary Tyler Moore Show."

The writers and, yes, the producers of that show were responsible for the forward-thinking attitudes of that time. "You're going to make it after all" if you are an actress, married to the producer of a well-written, groundbreaking show.