Dear Editor: Jersey City is sacrificing the revenue it needs for public services and education in order to give tax abatements to financial firms; but, attracting these firms is not what the city needs. Jersey City depended on industry for jobs and tax revenue. Manufacturing jobs have left the city for the suburbs and the new entrepreneurs invest capital in mergers and real estate speculation. The waterfront has quickly developed, with taxpayer assistance, to accommodate a service economy. Corporate welfare, called public-private partnership, generates many job announcements, but not new jobs. Tax abatements are obviously needless for prime real estate during a building boom. Despite the low vacancy rate in New York City, tax abatements are still given to enable speculators to pad the prices of their Jersey City parcels. York Street realtor Bob Antonicello, President of ACI, boasted to the New York Times that Jersey City surpasses Newark as a Class A market and moving here is a "no brainer" because Jersey City is a fully viable corporate address. One of his clients, Hartz Mountain, received a 30 year tax abatement to build a hotel after it was already involved in the local hotel boom. When luxury apartments and office towers receive abatements, everyone else has to pay more. Although recipients claim that they do not depend on the public school system, they are just as dependent on the workforce built on public education. Additionally, many wealthy families hire household labor, without paying taxes, while the worker's children go to public school. Jersey City should unilaterally stop granting abatements. Another source of housing stock and tax revenue has been warehoused by speculators-abandoned buildings. By granting funds and abatements lot buyers during a real estate boom, we encourage the owners to prolong this blight until the market is ripe. If the city and community groups were willing to stop assisting buyers, low prices could suffice to convert these properties to housing stock and ratables. The bottom line is simple; the city could get more by giving away less. Gary S. Canns