Mr Flanigan

Thank you for James Flanigan's article in support of the SEC attack on insider trading. I am one of the "little guys" who invest in the stock market and have been increasingly concerned with the detrimental effect the "big boys" are having on the market. We need people with courage to speak out! Congratulations, Mr. Flanigan, and keep up your fine work! MARIE EDWARDS Culver City

I could not help but notice the last sentence in James Flanigan's "Should We Fear High-Pay Job Shift?" (June 22): "Welcome to the globalization of work." You mean just maybe President Bush is not responsible for all the job losses that have occurred since he took office? Could it also be that our current economic conditions are the result of the go-go '90s, which had for the most part an economy based on "speculation"? Or is Mr. Flanigan afraid to admit that presidents no longer control our economy as much as Wall Street, Main Street and the rest of the world do?

It is unfortunate that columnist James Flanigan buys into the liberals' arguments on the recently enacted landmark illegal immigration reform law, obviously without taking even a minute to read the legislation for himself ("New Bill on Immigration Is Borderline at Best," Sept. 29). Had he done his own homework, he would have discovered that the new law significantly strengthens and toughens our laws against hiring illegal aliens. Mr. Flanigan claims that there are no new workplace inspectors authorized in the law. But it provides 900 new Immigration and Naturalization Service investigators whose principal role will be to find and arrest illegal aliens who are taking Americans' jobs.

Re: "Outsiders Have Inside Track Handling Data," James Flanigan, Dec. 1. Here is another bit of comforting news: American Express has signed with IBM to process its credit card and banking transactions and be "responsible for adjusting its information needs to changing competitive conditions" (Read: confidential information sharing/selling). Mr. Flanigan reports that IBM also is wooing a similar contract with J.P. Morgan Chase. With IBM already under a government contract , U.S. Atty.

Why is it reasonable to expand LAX (89 million planned vs. 64 million current passengers per year) when El Toro will pick up only 14 million passengers and underused John Wayne will expand by only 1.5 million ["Airport Needs Clear; Outcome Foggy," James Flanigan on Southern California, Dec. 7] . Why will we in the communities surrounding LAX be burdened with the majority of the Southern California air transport growth, while Orange County demands minimum impact? It's because of the prevailing NIMBY attitude, combined with the fact that people there have more money, and therefore influence, than the less wealthy neighbors of LAX. Thus Ms. Kennard, Mr. Riordan, and others (including you, Mr. Flanigan)

I could not help but notice the last sentence in James Flanigan's "Should We Fear High-Pay Job Shift?" (June 22): "Welcome to the globalization of work." You mean just maybe President Bush is not responsible for all the job losses that have occurred since he took office? Could it also be that our current economic conditions are the result of the go-go '90s, which had for the most part an economy based on "speculation"? Or is Mr. Flanigan afraid to admit that presidents no longer control our economy as much as Wall Street, Main Street and the rest of the world do?

As a member of the State Teachers' Retirement System, I would like to thank Tom Flanigan not only for saving the system in the '80s, but mostly for being a prudent investor (columnist Tom Petruno's "Pension Funds' Returns Diverge, Sparking Debate," Market Beat, Feb. 12). Maybe greed is good for some folks, but it's hardly the right approach for a retirement fund. Why does this remind me of the story about companies who want to charge the people who pay their bank cards monthly? Mr. Flanigan may just come out smelling like a rose if he isn't fired by the bureaucrats.

Re: "Outsiders Have Inside Track Handling Data," James Flanigan, Dec. 1. Here is another bit of comforting news: American Express has signed with IBM to process its credit card and banking transactions and be "responsible for adjusting its information needs to changing competitive conditions" (Read: confidential information sharing/selling). Mr. Flanigan reports that IBM also is wooing a similar contract with J.P. Morgan Chase. With IBM already under a government contract , U.S. Atty.

Columnist James Flanigan ("Can Europe Become More Like California?" Feb. 9) writes, "And there is special regard [among Europeans] for California, which is seen, rightly, as having come back from recession and the decline of the defense industry by putting people to work in new industries related to computer and software development, business and financial services, foreign trade and entertainment." While taken as a general whole there is nothing obviously wrong with Mr. Flanigan's statement, it is very misleading with respect to Los Angeles in particular.

James Flanigan, who lives and writes in the city with the dirtiest air in America, takes no ethical or economic position in "The Administration's Wrong Turn on Energy Taxes" in The Times on Sunday, June 12. Why shouldn't the President promote a BTU tax to help balance our budget when everyone accepts the logic of increasing taxes on harmful substances like liquor and tobacco? Why shouldn't Bill Clinton recommend a tax break for natural gas, which is the only clean fuel in abundant supply in the United States?

Why is it reasonable to expand LAX (89 million planned vs. 64 million current passengers per year) when El Toro will pick up only 14 million passengers and underused John Wayne will expand by only 1.5 million ["Airport Needs Clear; Outcome Foggy," James Flanigan on Southern California, Dec. 7] . Why will we in the communities surrounding LAX be burdened with the majority of the Southern California air transport growth, while Orange County demands minimum impact? It's because of the prevailing NIMBY attitude, combined with the fact that people there have more money, and therefore influence, than the less wealthy neighbors of LAX. Thus Ms. Kennard, Mr. Riordan, and others (including you, Mr. Flanigan)

Columnist James Flanigan ("Can Europe Become More Like California?" Feb. 9) writes, "And there is special regard [among Europeans] for California, which is seen, rightly, as having come back from recession and the decline of the defense industry by putting people to work in new industries related to computer and software development, business and financial services, foreign trade and entertainment." While taken as a general whole there is nothing obviously wrong with Mr. Flanigan's statement, it is very misleading with respect to Los Angeles in particular.

As a member of the State Teachers' Retirement System, I would like to thank Tom Flanigan not only for saving the system in the '80s, but mostly for being a prudent investor (columnist Tom Petruno's "Pension Funds' Returns Diverge, Sparking Debate," Market Beat, Feb. 12). Maybe greed is good for some folks, but it's hardly the right approach for a retirement fund. Why does this remind me of the story about companies who want to charge the people who pay their bank cards monthly? Mr. Flanigan may just come out smelling like a rose if he isn't fired by the bureaucrats.

It is unfortunate that columnist James Flanigan buys into the liberals' arguments on the recently enacted landmark illegal immigration reform law, obviously without taking even a minute to read the legislation for himself ("New Bill on Immigration Is Borderline at Best," Sept. 29). Had he done his own homework, he would have discovered that the new law significantly strengthens and toughens our laws against hiring illegal aliens. Mr. Flanigan claims that there are no new workplace inspectors authorized in the law. But it provides 900 new Immigration and Naturalization Service investigators whose principal role will be to find and arrest illegal aliens who are taking Americans' jobs.

James Flanigan, who lives and writes in the city with the dirtiest air in America, takes no ethical or economic position in "The Administration's Wrong Turn on Energy Taxes" in The Times on Sunday, June 12. Why shouldn't the President promote a BTU tax to help balance our budget when everyone accepts the logic of increasing taxes on harmful substances like liquor and tobacco? Why shouldn't Bill Clinton recommend a tax break for natural gas, which is the only clean fuel in abundant supply in the United States?

Thank you for James Flanigan's article in support of the SEC attack on insider trading. I am one of the "little guys" who invest in the stock market and have been increasingly concerned with the detrimental effect the "big boys" are having on the market. We need people with courage to speak out! Congratulations, Mr. Flanigan, and keep up your fine work! MARIE EDWARDS Culver City

In "On Affirmative Action, School Is by No Means Out" (June 18), James Flanigan states, "Still, it would have been better if, like returning World War II and Korean War veterans, Vietnam vets had been given a GI Bill of Rights, with money for education or to start a business or buy a home." In 1972 when I was attending college, there were many Vietnam vets on campus, myself included. Did I miss something in the article, or did Mr. Flanigan fail to do his research? WILLIAM T. DAVIS Pomona James Flanigan admits to being out of step on this issue.

James Flanigan made an excellent analysis of cash flow and profit structure of the illegal cocaine business. He should have left it at that, rather than wandering into those vague generalities regarding results if legalization were to take place. Let's face it: William Bennett and President Bush (perhaps less flamboyantly) are Rambos in business suits. Earmarking billions of dollars for materiel and "advisers" for Colombia and more cops and jails at home gets their adrenaline going; using those billions for inner-city education, economic improvement and treatment for addicts would be so boring.