Page 61 - Scrimshaw1975-76

Wednesday, December 3, 1975 Scrimshaw ....5 Personal ViewPoint: The New Student Center bV Mark Flaharty I think it's great that our ad- For thOse-ecological minded is this money coming from? Kim ministrators want to expand persons on campus, there's a good Shrewbridge answers this question WMC's campus, especially possibility that the construction of in her Scrimshaw article (Nov. 19 with the students interest in a building mid-campus _will mean vol. 2 issue 10). The money will mind. But how can we really ex- the destruction of the only group of come "from a capital drive pand our campus by constructing trees we have to enjoy without program." This means- that stu- another building in the middle going back-campus. I think many dents presently attending WMC, of campus? I know the argument students at WMC chose this school alumni, and friends of the college is that a centralized location partially because WMC offered a will be asked to pick up the tab. I for the proposed student center nice setting for the pursuit of remind you that possibly only the will be more convenient for every- higher education. If we'd wanted a present freshmen class will be able body. But what's wrong with the campus with wall-to-wall to actually see enduse the finished present location of the student buildings, we cou1d have chosen a center. center? Sure, it means having to major university. walk a little way to get there, but I don't want to sound as though walking to the student center is The way plans stand now, the I'm totally against a new student about the only exercise many road through central-campus will center. But I think before we go students and administrators get be blocked by the new center. ahead and build an entirely new around here l Won't this create an obstacle to fire building, we should look into other fighting vehicles? Not only will possibilities such as expanding the I agree with Greg Stout's opinion motorized traffic be cut off by the present facilities. If we must have expressed in the Nov. 10 issue of new center, but pedestrian traffic a new building, let's expand our Scrimshaw (vel. 2 issue 10) that the as well will be disrupted. In most campus and build back-campus. space defined by the Elderdice- cases, persons entering the Memorial-Rouzer triangle has got cafeteria, leaving or entering Apology to be the worst possible place. Not Rouzer via the side entrance, only will the noise and confusion of leaving or entering Memorial via Scrimshaw apologizes for the use a student center be disturbing to the north entrance, or entering of Millers Electrical's name in the residents of Rouzer, but there's a ·Elderdice via the front entrance, editorial of Nov. 19, 1975. The use of [possibility that classes in must pass through the student the word electrician would have Memorial (and night classes ex- center. sufficed. It should be stressed that peeially) may be disrupted by the Many of the present up- :ea~~~~ ~~lle~b~:~~;n~h:~~ activity in a new student center. As Greg said, "While construction is !::e~~s~~~ ~i~u~Fe:~~~~i':ti: form, or manner. The point of the going on, all the noise and mess L... ..:;.{.;::,...:..,..I-'--- __ -'-..::..-+ will be right in the middle of ~:~~~ c~ns~~:~~o~~~~ ~01'~:7~~::;~lg~~~~i:n~~~~~~~~:cne~ campus ... " Who wants to look at Letter to the editor;~~;;~i""'OUgl"h.'me.,f"two :~~~~~t~~~~~~~ri~~~uil~~~f-~_!_Ye_,~_e~_u_,e_of_M_H_'e_c'_'_na_m_e_',_, isn't expected to be completed until In Hamilton, Bermuda, Erskine Dear Editor in jumping over dirt piles and May I ask what will happen to at least 18 months alter that (fall Lawrence Ebbin was knocked I fu1ly agree with Greg Stout dodging dump trucks. After all Elderdice whe~ the administration 1978-early spring 1979), the only down by a taxi and killed by the' (Letters to the Editor, Nov. 19). that we'll have an extra building takes over the first Ilccr of our new students presently attending WMC same taxi with the same driver an Nobody seems to realize how long add~d to this already over cen- center? Since money has recently who will have a chance of actually carrying the same passenger that it's going to take to build the new tralized campus. There's hardly been spent to clean up the front of seeing and using the finished killed his brother Neville almost Student Center. Even the present room for all of the present Elderdice, will more money have product will be the present fresh- one year ago to the day. And, police freshman class won't reap the buildings. In my opinion, a new '0 be spent to convert the office man class. said, both brothers were riding the benefits from the center until their Student Center just isn't worth the space to dorm space (which we same bicycle and both died at the senior year. Meanwhile, two years trouble. keep hearing we need more oO? Money must also be raised to the age of seventeen on the same of the time spent here will be used Name withheld upon request What's the story here? tune of $2.4 million or more. Where "'''''c_,,ee'''t. -' Personal ViewPoint: Poverty and Economics by Richard M. Tucker Americans, and especially well- Price controls create shortages, "right" distribution is determined percent, and also that the govern- $6,000 per household to the 10 educated and well-off Americans, unemployment, and decreased it is well within the scope of ment determines that a family of percent with the lowest incomes. are widely known for their good total output. How will this aid the ecoromtcs to analyze the effects of four will be quaranteed an income Fourthly, it would allow the will and charity, and nowhere is poor, or government deficits which different methods of redistribution of $3,000. Now, if the family earns dismantling of the massive social this more evident than in the way create inflation, falling real in- upon the efficient allocation (given no income the government would welfare bureaucracies, allowing that they evaluate their public comes, and then unemployment? an income distribution) of scarge send them a subsidy of $3,000. If, these resources to be used policy alternatives. Americans Minimum wage laws create resources. The lesson to learn from however, they earn $1,500 the elsewhere. The Internal Revenue have perfected the technique of unemployment among the very this analysis is that to have the Goverrunent would reduce the Service would administer the "poor folk" analysis, i.e. deeming poorest and least skilled workers, least disruptive effect upon the subsidy by only $750 (note the 50 program within the current income a policy proper if, supposedly, it preventing them from receiving efficiency of the economy, income percent tax). i.e. the family would tax system, in effect replacing will benefit, and not cost, "the the on-the-job training which would redistribution should be done receive a $2,250 subsidy from the many of the thousand individual poor," and otherwise deeming it raise their productivity and outside of individual markets, not government for a total income of bureaus spread throughout the immoral and unacceptable. Part of ultimately their incomes. Are through them. This is the way to $3,750. Note the incentive that this government in H.U.D., H.E.W., the the popularity of this method may these laws moral? Rent control redistribute the pieces of the pie system would maintain for a Labor Department, and elsewhere. be due to the increased, yet laws create housing shortages and without unnecessarily shrinking family to work to increase their Finally, the negative income tax erroneous, feeling among many over the long run slums. Is this the size of the pie. total income (earned income plus system would maintain work in- average Americans that they too really what we want? Restrictions One very efficient means of subsidy). If the family earns $6,000 centives and would only minimally are becoming part of "the poor." to free international trade raise the income redistribution, virtually the government would send the affect the efficiency of the Nevertheless altruim is the major costs of our imports and reduce the unanimously endorsed throughout family no subsidy, neither- would economy. attraction. A few examples will total world income. Is this the way the economics profession, is the they charge the family a tax. The Nixon administration at- suffice to demonstrate its wide to achieve world economic negative income tax. This is how it Beyond $6,000 every dollar earned tempted to inact a negative income application. We must not de- development? The answers to all of works. First,' the government by the family would pay a tax of tax but failed in Congress. Their control oil prices as .poor people the questions above are negative. determines the minimum income $.50. The implementation of a version was called the Family would then not be able to cheaply In short, "poor folk" analysis more that will be guaranteed to a family negative income tax would be Assistance Plan, and had it sur- heat their homes and gas their often than not leads to coun- of a particular size regardless of slightly more complex than my vived our federal budget might not cars. We must not cut the growth of terproductive policy which in the that family's earnings. In the example implies, but the principle now be so obese: One major reason the government budget for the long run adversely affects all extreme case that the family earns would basically be the same. that it failed was that social heaviest loss of services would be segments of society, including and nothing the Internal Revenue The advantages of replacing the workers were against it, forming a to the poor. We must have a especially "the poor." Service would send the family a present hodgepodge welfare highly effective "veto group." minimum wage law to prevent All of the policies I have subisdy of that amount. In order to system with the negative income They, of course, stood to lose many unfair "exploitation" of the poor discussed have one thing in maintain work incentives, tax are significant. First, society jobs with the streamlining of the worker by capitalists. We must common, they are all atempts to however, any income that the would be able to more clearly welfare state. Nevertheless, there have rent control laws to protect redistribute income via in- family does earn would be met evaluate the costs and benefits of may be hope in the future for a poor tenants from the greed of terferring with the functioning of with a smaller decrease in the size redistribution. The costs would be negative income tax, especially if their landlords. We must not allow individual markets, both markets of the subsidy. Thus it wou1d more explicit and society could intelligent people understand what the exportation of wheat abroad for the factors of production and always pay for a family to work determine if it was getting what it it is about. With such a program because then pooor families would markets for final goods and ser- even though they would be wanted. Secondly, the aid would be perhaps people would be more be unable to afford their daily vices. The point I wish to convey in receiving government aid. At some more equitable in that it would De willing to evaluate policy questions bread. All of these widely held this essay is that this approach to income level the family wou1d given in more direct proportion to on grounds other than how they opinions demonstrate the income redistribution is not the receive no subsidy, nor pay a tax. need than are existing programs. supposedly would affect the poor. generousity of the American most efficient. The "proper and Above this income level the family Thirdly, it would be less expensive. Till then we are in danger of hind- citizen, yet they also demonstrate just" distribution of income and would pay a positive tax. A l\lilton Friedman calculated that ering our economy in the name of the unsophisticated and wealth in a society is a value numerical example will perhaps the 1961 total expenditures on the poor, and as a wise man once inadequate nature of this method judgement ultimately to be made clarify this system. Suppose that social welfare would have financed said, we must do well before we of analysis. politically by society. But, once the the tax rate is decided to be 50 outright cash grants of nearly can do good.