The Blame for Italy's Slave Trade Is Misplaced (int'l edition)

I found ''Workers in bondage'' (Investigations, Nov. 27) timely and accurate. But I also found its tone offending. The casual reader could infer that more than one-quarter of the Italian economy works by exploiting slavery and poverty. We are still a country of 56 million people, and though the numbers of the slave trade are scary and rising, they are still quite modest vs. the size of our economy.

You duly point out that patrolling our borders (coasts and mountains) is hard, but you fail to remind that we are also the country in Western Europe that is most exposed to this traffic because of our geographical location. Also, not one euro--or dollar, for that matter--has been contributed by Germany, France, or others to help us, although after the implementation of the Schengen agreements and the lowering of border controls between members, our coasts are ''French'' and ''German'' as well.

You fail to stress that thousands of refugees come not just from impoverished countries, but from places like Kurdistan, where a country is not allowed to be born because some Western governments do not want to upset Turkey, a good ally. Politics, too, can create slaves.

You fail to remind that thousands of refugees are sheltered, fed, and welcomed every month by Italian nongovernmental organizations and ordinary people without any reward other than a smile from those poor victims.

Your report is scary, and the terrible slave traffic exists. But we Italians bear little responsibility and most of the burden, and this is not clear in your report. Western governments can do a lot about it, but we also need support and not finger-pointing, which is especially unfair when it comes from a country where sweatshops are widely used by large companies, although in a more sophisticated form: They are just kept abroad, in Mexico, Indonesia, etc.

Alberto Canesi
Rome

A Word of Warning from a Trailblazing Manager (int'l edition)

Regarding ''Managers without borders'' (Special Report, Nov. 20): I am a European middle manager with a lifetime's experience of living and working in Germany, Italy, Greece, and Britain, not to mention five years in Africa. A word of warning from a trailblazer who has just reached the age of 60. Your report focuses on the young (Dublin) or the already highly successful top-of-the-tree CEOs (all men, I see). You also predict that greater geographical mobility will filter down the scale of employment, to less exalted levels.

The real problems that people lower down the ladder will have to deal with are those that I now face: the still totally fragmented nature of national health, tax, and pension systems in Europe. I have legally been obliged to pay into the state systems of each of the countries in which I have worked. Each country has a different minimum number of years, after which you can take your contributions with you if you leave. I am now, after 40 years of carefully carrying tatty little bits of stamped, pink paper around with me, trying to persuade the British pension authorities that these museum pieces should entitle me to some kind of patchwork pension from these different countries. And I am not optimistic.

Talk of tax harmonization in Europe has always been targeted toward helping cross-border trade. But the real disincentive for anyone to leave her/his own country to work in another is this lack of tax, state welfare, and pensions standardization for individuals, whether they are managers or not.

Alison Graham
Athens

Barro Needs to Look at the Big Picture (int'l edition)

In ''Gore's 'reckless and offensive' passion for the environment'' (Economic Viewpoint, Nov. 6), Robert J. Barro tells his readers not to vote for Al Gore because Gore may oppose the destruction of a vast wilderness in Alaska. Barro calculates this destruction is justified in order to explore the oil there, as this wilderness is not especially attractive. He does not specify what cost-benefit model he uses to reach his conclusion.

Barro does not seem to be concerned about the big picture--that the U.S., slightly over 4% of the world population, consumes about one-third of the world's energy. What is Barro telling us, and what is he teaching? Is this helping create a long-term vision or are we confronted with a shortsighted, irresponsible view? Who is ''reckless and offensive'' and arrogant here?

Izaak L G van Melle
Breda, The Netherlands