To the editor:

As part of our social studies curriculum, I teach a unit on Lawrence each year. Students study our community from geographic, political, cultural, economic and historical perspectives. Invariably, at the conclusion of this unit my students as well as their parents feel an increased awareness and a heightened sense of pride in their hometown.

Inevitably, as we wrap up our discussions and projects about Lawrence, I have a few insightful students who ask (and I paraphrase), “If Lawrence is such a great place, how come we still have so many poor and homeless people? Why don’t our leaders help them, too?”

Although my students do not possess the in-depth understanding of supply and demand that Clint Bradley (Public Forum, March 8) apparently does, they do understand the importance of presenting arguments in context. Mr. Bradley failed to mention the tax abatement piece of the living wage ordinance in his letter, which clearly explains the answer to his own living wage question: “Why not all businesses?”

The 8- and 9-year-olds in my charge are incredibly compassionate. We, as adults, have lessons to learn from them. As we approach the city’s sesquicentennial anniversary, I’d like to think that I’d be able to tell those students that our city’s leaders are working on solving those very problems by supporting initiatives that are sensitive to the needs of that population as well as the best use of our community’s resources.

Marion Anderson,

Lawrence