It was poor taste for you to mention your husband's $10,000 bonus, or whatever it was. Modesty should have dictated that you not tell the amount. Surely you realize that the general readership of this paper can't relate to having so much to spend on anything.

Was this a gift or payment? Did you know that a worker in the public sector would be fired for accepting this if it were a gift? Someone working in the defense industry also has such rules.

Although part of our current economic problems were caused by people buying homes or living on credit when they could afford neither, corrupt people at the top participated in unethical business practices that have affected each middle and lower income person, whether or not they were imprudent. Many innocent people have been hurt by greed from the bottom and the top.

Sadly, your recent columns have had a "let them eat cake" ring to them, which I don't think you intended.

You have lost a reader.

Re: I'm Through

I think that it was essential for the author to include the amount. If she had just said her husband was given a gift certificate, the rest of the article would not have made sense. Also, readers could still infer that the amount of the gift certificate was extensive because she purchased multiple large items with the sum.

I also think that you show little class implying that her husband could have been fired for accepting such a gift.

Read the column and calm down.