STEVE FORBES' CONTROVERSIAL NOTION

"Explain to me the flat-tax theory that money given to the rich stimulates the economy, while money given to the poor does not." GORDON CARLSON Chicago

AN ENJOYABLE PART OF AMERICAN CAMpaigns is watching politicians reinvent themselves. Wealthy political outsider Steve Forbes [NATION, Jan. 29], while not having to reinvent himself, has reinvented the flat tax, an idea brought back to life by Jerry Brown during the 1992 presidential race. Forbes proposes to give every American, from the very poorest to the very richest, a tax break. Where will he get the revenue to run America? By taxing corporations. What a wonderful idea! Tax powerful companies, and give the money to everyone. Why is this rich, conservative Republican touting such a liberal idea? RANDY ROBERTS Raleigh, North Carolina Via E-mail

FAIR, UNFAIR, WHATEVER--THE FLAT TAX beats the present system! I for one am sick and tired of the unbelievable complexity of my annual tax returns simply because I earn money outside a regular payroll. Our current irs laws actually punish anyone for being even a little tempted toward ventures that show initiative or entrepreneurship. We definitely need change if we want the U.S. to be a capitalist stronghold. OMER NISLEY Hanna, Indiana

YOUR ARTICLE ILLUSTRATED A MAJOR problem in the way we select the American President. Many voters tend to concentrate on a single issue and choose for office a candidate who embodies that lone ideal. However, the President has many roles to play, and when a candidate is selected because he embraces a certain policy, he can disappoint the public on other, less prominent policies. Single-issue voters are often surprised by the direction things take after they vote a President into office, when they learn his entire agenda. JOSEPH ROTUNDA San Antonio, Texas Via E-mail

HOW REFRESHING TO SEE FORBES MAKing a run for the presidency. Here is a man who, contrary to what many members of the press and politicians say, really understands the genius of private enterprise. Here is a man who has the guts to cut wasteful spending and downsize government. If he succeeds, our children and our children's children will once again be able to share in the American Dream. If one of the professional politicians wins, they cannot. FREDERICK N.C. JERAULD Boston, New York

BESIDES THE FLAT TAX, WHAT DOES Forbes have to stand on? Not experience. Not values. Not scrutinized integrity. America needs a leader for President, not simply somebody who can afford to campaign for the office. BRIAN STOUGHTON Nashua, New Hampshire

ALTHOUGH I WOULDN'T VOTE FOR HIM, Forbes seems bright enough for the presidency. It's a shame that he's hiding his brains behind his Johnny One-Note song about a 17% flat tax. MARGARET EISEN Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania Via E-mail

STEVE FORBES, THE PERFECT G.O.P. CANDIDATE: a rich white male with a tax plan that benefits rich white males. ARLEN GROSSMAN Monterey, California Via E-mail

TAXES SHOULD BE FLAT, NOT OUR WALLETS. DANIEL JOHN SOBIESKI Chicago

THE SUCCESS OF THE FORBES CANDIDACY is a sad example of the decline of American democracy. Of course, we have seen politically inexperienced rich men try to spend their way into high office before, but at least they could claim to be self-made, or they started with an office lower than the top one. Forbes is a very good argument against the American idea that every child can aspire to be President. How far we have come from the days when a man had to claim to be born in a log cabin to run. Forbes' "new idea" is yet another tax break for the rich disguised in pseudopopulist rhetoric and heavily promoted with television ads. JOHN CLARK Englewood, New Jersey

BOSNIA: CRIMES UNDERGROUND

I HAVE NEVER SEEN A MASS GRAVE AS HORrible as the one shown in the photograph with your article "Unearthing Evil" [WORLD, Jan. 29], about fresh evidence of war crimes in Bosnia. It is a new Holocaust. What is the difference between Bosnian Serbs and Nazis? Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic must be judged for what he has done. IBRAHIM MUNIR Bristol, England

DRUGS ACROSS THE BORDER

U.S. CITIZENS SHOULD REALIZE THAT when any merchandise, including drugs or cash, moves across the Mexican-U.S. border in either direction, it is inspected by both U.S. and Mexican customs authorities, each acting independently. Mexican officials and even Cabinet members, as your report suggests [WORLD, Jan. 29], can sell their protection, but this protection ends for reasons of sovereignty at the border. After that, it is in the hands of U.S. officials. How do drugs reach the streets of New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and other cities? Is it a mystery to Americans? SERGIO E. DE REGULES Naucalpan, Mexico

WHEN YOU WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT, YOU don't go out and try to shut down every bakery and fast-food outlet in town; you go on a diet. U.S. authorities should realize that so long as there is a multibillion-dollar demand for drugs, lots of people will go to any lengths to profit from that demand. The war on drugs will never be won until the real enemy is confronted and attacked. PEDRO MARTIN COLEA Mexico City

SAFETY IN THE WORKPLACE

I WOULD LIKE TO CORRECT AN ERROR that appeared in your article "Hauling UPS's Freight" [BUSINESS, Jan. 29]. A graphic accompanying the story identified UPS as the "biggest contributor" to the Coalition on Occupational Safety and Health. In fact, UPS did not make any financial contribution to that organization, although we have contributed to the support of other efforts on OSHA reform. Also, you did not point out that the Teamsters' PAC fund (the Teamsters represent 170,000 UPS employees) spent $8.5 million in the 1993-94 election cycle, more than twice UPS PAC spending for the same period. On the issue of UPS's raising its maximum package weight limit from 70 to 150 lbs., we did so to meet existing weight limits of our chief competitors. We are proud of our 300,000 employees and will go to great lengths to create a safe work environment for our people. We also stand firmly behind our position that OSHA is sorely in need of reform. KENT C. NELSON, Chairman and CEO United Parcel Service Atlanta

We erred in the wording of our chart. The Coalition on Occupational Safety and Health, which lobbies for changes in OSHA, does not give money directly to political candidates. The chart should have stated that members of COSH, through their PACs, gave $3.6 million to members of the House in the first 10 months of 1995, and that UPS, with $590,820, was the largest corporate PAC giver from COSH.

I AM HORRIFIED AND DISGUSTED BY ATtempts to destroy OSHA's power to regulate workplace safety. Is there no end to the greed and ruthlessness displayed by U.S. business? There is only one answer: the working people of America--blue- and white-collar--must unionize to take back the power they once had. BARBARA DENUCCI HENDRICKSON Hayward, California

DISNEYLAND ROYALTY

JOHN ROTHCHILD, IN "TIME FOR WINDsorland" [ON THE MONEY, Jan. 29], is not the first to suggest that Disney could privatize the British monarchy. Back in 1979 a satirical book called The 80s: A Look Back at the Tumultuous Decade 1980-89 purported to recount the "greatest single land sale of the decade," in which the whole of Britain was sold to Disney to become a new theme park, the United Magic Kingdom. As the editors envisioned it, "Her Enchanted Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and her dancing horse Disraeli joined in a musical Trooping the Color, every hour on the hour." Sounds like a plan to me. JOYCE SAENZ HARRIS Dallas Via E-mail

AS A LOYAL AMERICAN CITIZEN OF BRITish ancestry, I was appalled by Rothchild's suggestion that the British royal family become part of Disney's cast of characters. Why does Rothchild care what the royal family does? It is no drain on his financial resources. The American tabloid press pounces on every salacious tidbit about the family it can glean from any source. The good the British royal family does is not reported. JEAN CRAWFORD DONALD Burbank, California

AMERICAN JOBS AT STAKE

YOUR ARTICLE ON THE U.S. GOVERNment's challenge to the European Union's trade quotas on bananas was distorted [BUSINESS, Jan. 22]. You failed to state that in 1993 an independent gatt panel ruled that the European banana-quota system was illegal and discriminatory to Chiquita Brands International. Our company's only request has been for the U.S. government to enforce that ruling. It was also misleading to state that U.S.-based Chiquita had "only a handful of American jobs" at stake. Before Colombia and Costa Rica illegally expropriated most of our European business, Chiquita employed 9,000 U.S. citizens. Several thousand of those Americans have already lost their jobs as a result of the illegal actions of these foreign governments. To imply that the livelihood of 9,000 American families is unimportant is highly irresponsible. Instead of ridiculing U.S. government involvement in this case, as if helping a U.S. company save U.S. jobs were some improper special interest, Time should praise government officials for fighting to save American jobs from illegal foreign expropriation. KEITH E. LINDNER, President Chiquita Brands International Cincinnati, Ohio