Boris Johnson’s Ascent

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/23/opinion/letters/boris-johnson-railroad-movies.html

Version 0 of 1.

To the Editor:

Re “Boris Johnson to Be U.K. Prime Minister After Winning Party Vote” (nytimes.com, July 23):

Boris Johnson and Donald Trump: It’s certainly not Churchill and Roosevelt, is it? We live in dangerous times.

Lori R. SchackBerkeley, Calif.

To the Editor:

Donald Trump and Boris Johnson seem like two of a kind; they even look like each other. But as Mr. Johnson becomes prime minister of Britain, he will offer entertainment until he crashes and burns. Mr. Trump offers no such light moments.

Jennifer DornNew York

To the Editor:

Re “Years After Fiery Crash, Deadly Cargo Still Rides the Rails” (“Promises Made” series, July 17):

The 2013 Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, accident was a horrible tragedy. Railroads take numerous measures to ensure that hazardous materials move safely across the United States.

In fact, 99.9 percent of all hazardous-material shipments arrive without incident. Tougher tank car standards, enhanced braking capabilities, speed restrictions and route risk-analysis software have reduced risk and improved the safety of hazmat shipments.

Beyond these hazmat-specific initiatives, record investments — more than $25 billion a year — have advanced safety by addressing and eliminating the root causes of accidents. Today, positive train control is operating across more than 90 percent of required American route miles to combat human error, the leading cause of train accidents.

Additionally, cutting-edge technologies, like smart sensors and automated inspection equipment, proactively identify maintenance needs before an incident occurs.

These investments have paid off, making recent years the safest on record. But railroads will not rest until we are accident-free.

Ian JefferiesWashingtonThe writer is president and chief executive of the Association of American Railroads.

To the Editor:

Re “Action! A New Film Studio Is Planned in Queens” (news article, July 10):

It is understandable that Robert De Niro, the consummate New Yorker, would wish to establish his new production facility in the Big Apple. But it’s also worth asking — especially of someone as politically conscious as Mr. De Niro — would it not be better for the country if this cultural hub were placed almost anywhere else?

More than any single event in the last few decades, the election of Donald Trump made obvious the stark divide between “coastal elites” and “heartlanders.” But long before Mr. Trump descended his golden escalator, coastal liberals were rolling their eyes at the “flyover states,” and right-wing radio hosts were decrying “Hollywood elites.”

The decades-long consolidation of America’s urban artistic and professional class into a few particular cities has exacerbated cultural divides to the point that our democracy is barely functional.

Instead of being a drop in the artistic and financial buckets of America’s largest, wealthiest city, this $400 million project and the associated cultural impact could revitalize and cosmopolitanize an area negatively affected by the sprint to the coasts. The last thing we need is for America’s second Hollywood to be in New York City.

Oliver Kendall Washington