Letters to the editor: $56bn is a grotesque sum for Tesla to pay Elon Musk – that’s nearly a million teachers’ salaries

Tesla boss Elon Musk's expected pay is $56bn. Photo: Reuters

Letters to the editor

The Tesla board will on Thursday be considering Elon Musk’s total pay package, with a proposed value of $56bn (€52bn). This is simply not right. Based on the average US teacher’s salary of $58,210, he is earning the same as 962,034 teachers.

The US president gets $400,000 – about seven teacher salaries. That is a lot of money, but possibly acceptable given the president looks after 300 million people.

I might be biased as a retired teacher, but no one can make a million times the contribution I did, and so should not be paid that much.

A good solution would be to keep $1bn (still a generous salary), give $50bn to hire more teachers and use $5bn to build a rocket that doesn’t explode.

Dennis Fitzgerald, Melbourne, Australia

Philip Ryan got it wrong on McEntee – minister is ineffective in her brief

I didn’t vote for Sinn Féin, but I take issue with Philip Ryan’s article on Mary Lou McDonald.

I think he is wrong in relation to the Dublin riots and Justice Minister Helen McEntee – I believe she has been shown on numerous times to be ineffective in her brief.

Where is the analysis of Simon Harris’s strategy of empty soundbites and photo opps? I believe he is using migration as a deflective tactic. Such antics are worthy of Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage. The tents are our small boats.

I don’t think the media are looking as hard at the centre parties as they are at the others, and the sad truth is that these vacuous PR stunts appear to be working.

Name and address with editor

Vote results show people want sustainable future, not nationalist ideology

The shrinking of the Sinn Féin vote, along with the resilience shown by the Green Party, suggests much of the electorate wants a sustainable future in preference to a government grounded in a nationalist ideology.

Other than an imposed history of itself by vested interests, what is nationalism?

Eugene Tannam, Firhouse, Dublin 24

Social Democrats and Labour can prevent any further swing to the right

The outcome of the European and local elections suggests the next government will again be anchored around a Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil construct. However, there is a very real danger that the other components would be farther to the right.

Such a combination would threaten progress that has been made towards a more socially (though not economically) fair and equal society.

Labour and the Social Democrats can prevent such a regression and further a progressive agenda by combining to develop a common platform of the constructive left, prioritising public provision of housing, health and caring, as well as workers’ rights.

They should also promote the realisation of a united Ireland on the basis of consensus rather than a sectarian head count.

A merger between them is not necessary, but it is imperative to present the electorate with a viable centre-left alternative to the dominance of the three parties of the nationalist tradition.

Such a platform could attract others on the independent left and would be capable of gaining suffic­ient Dáil support to hold the centre of the ring, ensuring an economically and socially progressive public policy direction.

The interests of the people of all 32 counties must take priority over short-term manoeuvring for advantage.

Jack O Connor, Naas, Co Kildare

Disarming Hamas, not Israel, is the only way to end the conflict in Gaza

I wish to comment on the letter from Karol Balfe on Saturday, in which it was argued that the only way the war in Gaza can be stopped is by disarming Israel.

Israel did not break ceasefire last October 7 and murder more than 1,200 people and kidnap 230 others.

If there is to be an end to this awful war, Hamas must be disarmed, hostages must be released and a new political power must be agreed in Gaza, one that does not call for the destruction of Israel, but recognises and believes in a two-state solution so both peoples can live in peace and security.

Anthony Costello, Galway

Animals have rights too and all human must show them some consideration

Our relationship with animals is based entirely on their subjugation and our dominance.

The animal rights philosophy rejects this and instead believes in the fundamental right of non-hum­ans not to be used, owned, branded, labelled, enslaved, exploited and generally commodified to serve us.

Animals deserve certain kinds of consideration of what is in their best interests, regardless of whether any human cares about them at all.

It means recognising animals are not ours to use – for food, clothing, entertainment, transport, experim­entation. A dog or a pig or a cow has an interest in not having pain inflicted on it unnecessarily. We are obliged to take that interest into consideration and to respect animals’ right.

Speciesism is the human-held belief that all other animal species are inferior.

Gerry Boland, Keadue, Co Roscommon

Blind prejudice has taken over many in the media when it comes to Europe

Commenting on an escalation of mounting existential threats facing Europe, your editorial (‘As tensions mount in Europe, we need cool heads to represent us’, June 8) was hopeful that the new representatives elected to the European Parliament can dial down the overheated geopolitical tensions affecting Europe before matters pass a point of no return.

In what I think was an unintended amusing understatement of what can happen if the brakes are not quickly applied against the frenzied and deranged warmongering, the editorial said: “The consequences of a major miscalculation by either side are chilling.”

It appears a kind of blind prejudicial madness has overtaken certain members of the media and they cannot see that they helped drive Europe, and others, into a cul-de-sac that can lead to total obliteration (some might unkindly say, “serves them right”).

Some commentators in the media have convinced themselves there are wonder defensive weapons that can stave off the possible consequence of “a major miscalculation”, which, ironically, they may have helped to bring about.

Micheal O’Cathail, Dún Laoghaire, Co Dublin