You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
September 19, 2013 at 7:01 AM
Use cloth diapers
Nuts! For little more than the cost of a box of the disposable ones, a family could buy a dozen cloth diapers that would last through the child’s entire toilet training period. [“Lack of diapers creates problems for families,” News, Sept. 16.]
We raised seven happy, healthy kids in Seattle without ever using a disposable diaper. The diaper pail was like one of the family; it went everywhere with us — to friends’ houses for dinner, out to the ocean on vacation, wherever.
Now, 40 years after our youngest stopped needing them, we’re still using the last diapers as window-washing cloths.
Moreover, is there any other household item that has the horrendous impact on our solid waste landfills that millions of those disposable things do?
David Harris, Wenatchee
September 17, 2013 at 6:59 AM
My heart is aching for those people who don’t have diapers for their little ones. [“Lack of diapers creates problems for families,” News, Sept. 16.]
I know it is problematic to not be able to change babies’ diapers. But tell me this. Has anyone ever heard of cloth diapers that you use, wash and reuse continually?
Some cloth diapers could be distributed to these people with instructions on how to fold and wash the diapers, if anyone can still remember the procedure.
My husband and I raised three boys, and never used disposable diapers.
Isn’t it so much better for the environment to use the old-fashioned, regular cloth diapers?
Mary Hickey, Oak Harbor
July 22, 2013 at 7:03 PM
Allotment is too much
Kyung Song’s illuminating story on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) was the first time I’ve seen a monthly allotment for a participant, and it made me question my support for such low-income food assistance. [“A food-stamp fight over values,” page one, July 18.]
$526 a month is very generous for a three-member family. I checked with Seattle-area friends who have kids, who were flabbergasted by how quickly Davida Norrell ran out of program benefits (two weeks), when they don’t spend that in a full month on larger families.
If she or her daughters cooked, instead of buying microwave meals, and ate reasonable portions, Norrell could stretch her dollar — our tax dollars — much further.
This generous allotment, which encourages overeating and poor nutrition, seems to work at cross-purposes to Michelle Obama’s anti-obesity campaign.
Sadly, I’m not surprised our government is defeating itself.
Greg Piper, Seattle
May 3, 2013 at 6:06 AM
Affordable housing is scarce because of strict regulations
Rachel Myers’ op-ed bemoaned the lack of affordable housing in Seattle [“Affordable housing is a myth for struggling King County families,” Opinion, April 28]. The “cures” were the same we always hear: Squeeze developers to sell below market, more government funding and prohibit landlords from turning away Section VIII applicants.
The next day, a Seattle Times editorial attacked an innovative-housing product and the entrepreneurs who are privately addressing the problem [“Seattle should impose controls on ‘aPodments,’” Opinion, April 29]. Why is low-income housing so scarce here?
Seattle smugly regulated the flop houses out of business with code stipulations that made housing low-income people prohibitive, throwing hundreds out on the streets. Is an indigent human being safer and better off getting drunk in some fleabag hotel or shooting up in a brier patch on Lower Queen Anne?
Every land use, insulation, lead paint, energy, sprinkler, plumbing, electrical, or anti-discrimination-code upgrade dissuades more owners from renting at all. Present landlord-tenant laws so burden property owners that getting rid of a bad renter is like pulling teeth. It involves lawyers, the sheriff and months on end while the tenant refuses to pay and trashes the place on the way out.
Jeffrey Howard, Redmond
Trending with readers