Economy: We need a goal

I'm reading news where the price of gas is down, consumer confidence is mixed, home values are down and stories from various online sources say we need to get prepared for a long recovery, or worse.

So, as a homeowner, as a currently employed person and as a person with some assets, what can I (we) do to help improve the economy? What can we all do to improve the economy?

I fear that even if I work hard and do my job well, my clients are likely to be affected, which will trickle down to me. If I lose business, my income will be reduced, and that may cause difficulties in paying my bills. So, ultimately, the banks I am (we are) bailing out today in a year may very well be the banks that are reporting my bad credit as a result of the ripple effect of the bailouts.

All I hear daily is bad, bad, bad, crisis, fear, layoffs and worse. I'm looking for a ray of hope, something to shoot for, a goal.

I would not buy a deli sandwich with this level of understanding of what I'm buying.

– H. Redlus, Roseville

Small sacrifice by state workers

Re "State has holiday spirit – in excess" (Editorial, Nov. 13): I rarely agree with the governor, which makes this more interesting. The governor wants to eliminate two holidays for state employees. Eliminating Columbus Day and combining Washington's and Lincoln's birthdays for state employees would save California $40 million this year and $75 million next year.

State workers would still get 11 paid holidays, which is still more than private employers give. Losing two holidays is a small sacrifice for state employees to make, and it is a much better plan than taking money away from education. It's not like the employees don't get to keep their jobs; the only thing they really lose is some perks the job gives them. I think it's OK to lose some perks if it can help California with its budget crisis. Everyone in the state needs to make sacrifices to get the budget problem under control, so the state employees must do their part.

– Jagraj Mandare, Live Oak

Don't admit unprepared students

Re "UC may cut some admission requirements" (Page A1, Nov. 19): I strongly disagree with what professor Mark Rashid wants to do. The SATs were designed to find out how you will perform in college. If we lower the requirements of the SATs, we are just making our country more stupid. This means that we could be letting people into college who aren't ready and who will take the place of kids who would do well.

In order to remain competitive with other countries, we need our best and brightest students in college. In this article, they make it seem that if people don't get into one of these UC schools, they're doomed for life, but what people don't think about is that there are still other options, such as community college, for the kids who aren't quite smart enough for UC. In conclusion, letting unprepared students into these certain colleges is just bad policy.

– Jake Lanich, Sacramento

eighth-grader, Sutter Middle School

Governor is right about taxes

Re "A dire fiscal crisis calls for strong action" (Editorial, Nov. 9): I think Arnold Schwarzenegger is doing a good job as governor. For the dire fiscal crisis, I agree with him on raising taxes. Raising taxes is a great idea. I think it's about keeping money in the government's pocket for social services; it's like doing charity for the state. Everyone is pitching in – that's great!

The good thing about taxing us more is that there will be more money not only for social services but for education, health and criminal justice. Everything else that people get is a luxury. The more free or inexpensive services we give to people, the more they expect from the government. How do people expect to get more from the government without the government running out of funds that pays for services? Where does the money come from? Well, it has to come from somewhere, and that's why it's important for the state government to tax us. It's only fair. Good job, governor.