Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (March 10, 1983)
Page 2/The Battalion/Thursday, March 10, 1983 X L°ve You, MeNRV, Bur iT’U- NeveR work. Your Vipeo RecoRDeR i& BeTa, HfNe i& VH§; You Have a SaTeU-iTe DiSH, r’M HaPPV WiTft caBiej awo our coMPuieR& aRe ToTaU-Y iNcowPaTiBLe. CEEcnJ |0©© c^IeiN mea QOCKW MtW. HZuIS, .•83 How to restructure your own bank loan by Art Buchwald Dunaway told Tinker and me the other day that the bank was going to fore close on his house because he was unem ployed and could not make his payments. He asked us if we had any ideas. Tinker said he would go down to the bank with him and see if he could help him out. 1 tagged along to give Dunaway moral support. “We re here today,” Tinker told the vice president, “to restructure Dunaway’s loan.” “And what exactly does that mean?” the VP asked. “Dunaway is not able to pay on his note, and therefore we want to postpone his payments until he gets a job.” “We don’t do that.” “The heck you don’t,” Tinker said. “You people are restructuring loans all the time. You do it with Poland every year.” “Poland’s a country. Mr. Dunaway is an individual.” “You’re doing it for Pan American Airways.” “Pan American Airways is a company.” “Why isn’t Mr. Dunaway entitled to the same treatment you give Poland and Pan Am?” “We can’t foreclose on Poland. It would start a panic in world banking cir cles. And we have to give Pan American a chance, or we’ll never see our money again.” “How much does Poland owe you?” “Somewhere in the area of a billion dollars.” “Well, Mr. Dunaway only owes you $50,000, and you have a better chance of getting that back from him than you have of getting your billion dollars from Po land.” “You’re obviously ignorant as to the way banks operate. When someone owes us $50,000 we take his house. When someone owes us over a million we have to work something out to make it possible for him to pay us back.” “Then what you are saying is that Mr. Dunaway doesn’t owe you enough money to get any respect?” “Don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is that we don’t restructure $50,000 mortgage loans. It isn’t worth our time to postpone the payments on them.” “Fair enough,” Tinker said. “That’s why we’ve come to see you. We’re not here to pay back the $50,000. We’re here to borrow another $950,000, so we can owe the bank an even million.” I was tugging on Tinker’s sleeve ner vously. The VP said, “You must be crazy to ask for a $950,000 loan. What kind of collateral can you put up?” “We’ll put up the same collateral Mex ico and Brazil did to get their loans.” “What do you know about Mexico and Brazil?” “I understand each of them owes you $500 million and you can’t get your money back,” Tinker said. “I have it on good authority you are going to loan them more money so they can pay the interest on the money they’ve borrowed. Mr. Dunaway is willing to work out a similar arrangement. If you loan him the money to pay the interest on his mort gage, we won’t tell anyone about Brazil and Mexico.” “You can’t threaten me,” the VP said. “That’s what you think. According to my information, you have $4 billion in loans outstanding to the OPEC countries. Now that the price of oil has plummeted, your OPEC clients have informed you they won’t be able to meet their obliga tions. If word gets out that these loans could be in default, you’ll have a run on your bank that will make the Penn Square debacle look like a church picnic.” “What do you want from me?” the VP said, wiping his forehead with his hand kerchief. “We want you to give Mr. Dunaway the same financial courtesy you extendea to Poland. Allow him time to get a job, and don’t foreclose on his house until he gets back on his feet.” “I can’t make this decision myself. It will have to go to the Board of Directors.” “Well, don’t take too long about it,” Tinker snarled. “You’re not dealing with some banana republic.” USPS 045 360 Member ot Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editor Diana Sultenfuss Managing Editor Gary Barker Associate Editor Denise Richter City Editor Hope E. Paasch Assistant City Editor Beverly Hamilton Sports Editor John Wagner Entertainment Editor ....... Colette Hutchings Assistant Entertainment Editor . . . . Diane Yount News Editors Daran Bishop, Brian Boyer, • Jennifer Carr, Elaine Engstrom, Shelley Hoekstra, Johna Jo Maurer, Jan Werner, Rebeca Zimmermann Staff Writers Melissa Adair, Maureen Carmody, Frank Christlieb, Connie Edelmon, Patrice Koranek, John Lopez, Robert McGlohon, Ann Ramsbottom, Kim Schmidt, Patti Schwierzke, Kelley Smith, Angel Stokes, Tracey Taylor, Joe Tindel, Kathy Wiesepape Copyeditors JanSwaner, Chris Thayer Cartoonist Scott McCullar Graphic Artists Pam Starasinic Sergio Galvez Thompson, Fernando Andrade Photographers . David Fisher, Dena Brown, Eric Lee, Irene Mees, John Makely, William Schulz paper operated as a community service to Texas Ac'i-M University and Bryan-Collef'c Station. Opinions ex pressed in The Battalion are those ot the editor or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions ot 'Texas A&M University administrators or lacttlty mem bers. or ot the Board ot ticfrenis. 'The Battalion also serves as a laboratory neyyspaper lor students in reporting, editing and photography clas ses within the Department of Communications. Questions or comments concerning any editorial matter should be directed to the editor. Letters Policy Letters to the Editor should not exceed dOO words in length, and are subject to being cut if they are longer. The editorial staff reserves the t ight to edit letters for style and length, but will make every ef fort to maintain the author's intent. Each letter must also be signed and show the address and phone number of the writer. Columns and guest editorials are also welcome, and are not subject to the same length constraints as letters. Address all inquiries and correspondence to: Editor. The Battalion, 21(5 Reed McDonald. Texas A&M L'ni- versitv. College Station. TX 7784d. or phone (71d) 845- 2611. The Battalion is published daily during Texas A&rM's fall and spring semesters, except for holiday and exami nation periods. Mail subscriptions arc $ 16.75 per semes ter. $33.25 per school year anil $35 per full year. Adver tising rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit. selT-snpportinir netr.s- United Press International is entitled exclusively to the use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it. Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein reserved. Second class postage paid at College Station. TX 77843. Unfinished story of toxic wasti by Maxwell Glen and Cody Shearer Almost daily revelations about possi ble conflicts of interest and other indis cretions at the Environmental Protection Agency have prompted predictable rumblings. Journalists here make odds on how far the scandal’s taint will reach; lawmakers have seemed more obsessed with constitutional powers than with public health. Unfortunately, those outside this poli tical drama deserve to be cynical. Sure to remain after congressional committees have stalked their prey are some legiti mate questions about toxic waste. For example, how safe is safe? In Missouri an entire town has been bought out by Uncle Sam because its dioxin count exceeds safe levels of 50 parts per billion. Roughly speaking, a part per billion is equivalent to a drop within a train of 100 tank cars, one second in 32 years, one Yankee fan in all the sell-Cmt crowds in the history of the New York club. Environmentalist Gus Speth says the dangers of such “subtle menaces” vary “in inverse proportion to their ability to be quickly and easily understood.” from outright poisoning? While the answers are too complex to merit more than outline here, they have roots in America’s tremendous industrial and technological growth during the 20th century. Waste products from tex tiles, metal Finishing, tanneries, steel mills, pharmaceuticals, solvents and all manner of chemicals have generally been discarded by manufacturers in the cheapest way possible. While consumers happily reaped rewards of “better living through chemistry,” producers often re sorted to dumping byproducts to keep overhead down. At first, the wastes were nominal in bulk; today the U.S. accumulates 350 pounds of hazardous waste per person per year. And yet, according to Samuel Epstein, a University of Illinois medical professor and author of a recently- published book, “Hazardous Waste in America,” federal lawmakers — even during the ecologically-oriented 1970s — have attempted with only kid gloves to llu take on polluters. Why do we allow the manufacture of such deadly substances as dioxin, of which only three ounces could wipe out New York City’s population? Who de cides to unleash dangerous substances on an unwitting populace? Does Congress have the political will to fully safeguard the soil and water of future generations Take, for instance, the Toxic Subst ances Control Act of 1976, a well- meaning law that, by all regards, has lie- come practically useless. TSCA empow ers the EPA to ban certain toxins before they are marketed. Unfortunately, the law remains only half implemented, underfunded and excludes byproducts from its purview. As a result, argues Ep stein, the EPA has banned only a few dozen the several thousand chemicals in vented since 1976. Or consider another 1976 statute, the Resource Conservation am] Act. The law exempted smat| and any hybrid of toxic; material from regulation; coj mm h <>! i lie nation's danw leeches through legal loopbi Then there’s Superfund.J law l>\ I’ii adoni Ri agan FiiJ ly by contributions IrompruJ the Superfund lawalsoencoi to contribute money fon However, most states, alreat for cash don't set aside moa cleanup; if the state doesn'ti share to a cleanup effort, i response is statutorily limi(fii| Perhaps more discount is that certain solutionsalreai the safe management of i Many substances can bereadj or ini mri an d safely andprol non-toxic substitutes areal for many dangerous prodit market. Yet the public andp tors have been slow to reseanj velop new applications. Despite the ovenvhelminil implications of ignoringthwj meins m io\ii inanagementf lawmakers may be emironiM lent if oul\ I 1’ \ i hit I loses her job in the comingvd But America’s toxic moK beyond the combined gloprpi private dumps and poison-fact I around the U.S. Without pro | the grass roots, continues coni fc disregard f or life-threateningi | will assure the recurrencec tion horror stories in the fuiJ IP pr by LQOKMKS.,.THERE<50R WALTER MATTHAU'S GARAS£.„ B: I'ormer erues De; Rudder dnesdi A& M mus dition to si to beiom Aliericas. Look, s year’s Uni said that 1 efforts to meet the society, f Look, i lessor liei worries of next few' \ m—'find come. Loi gradual d revenues, ha\e to I money. »•— find jwith “st mint.” Ci Payment number < ave tak< People. recr students a from Latii Cook said Letters: Sex a decision made by Editor: To: Shawn Stevens It may be easier for you believing that morality is a unified thing. Yet morals are something every individual should de cide for themselves. If morals include pre-marital sex, they aren’t necessarily based on having a form of contraceptives available. Not all teens go around “secret ly” getting contraceptives. The secrecy of using contraceptives, comes after the de cision to have sex, which eliminates diffe rent beliefs and confrontation within a family. If pre-marital sex is not wrong to an individual, they will probably partici pate in it with or without birth control devices. Statistics prove that there are many unwed “mothers” in this country. Stating that pre-marital is a temporary feeling is generalizing an attitude that is different for every person involved. Not In closing. I’d like to restate that although all of us believe “morality can not be enforced’^, it has been said that parental guidance will help young teens “accept the standard of morality and make us act in a decent manner.” Why should our parents make a decision for us that we will eventually decide upon at “legal” age? Is there a belief that more girls decide not to have sex at eighteen because they didn’t when they were are ‘women promoting p. oducisi other women more desirablf aren’t the only ones that promoi! joy “lust.” younger: Shawn ends with the thoughi one must have sexual relations must ... get married.” The imp that premarital sex cannot be a" ing experience” or “decent” is I’m sure that more than four would sign this letter. C. Jackson ’85 Brian I Sex vs. lust Sex and taxes Editor: Editor: everyone loses their dignity and feels guilty about sex before marriage. Mar riage may be the only commitment worthy enough of sex for some, but the belief of “love” is also a commitment in itself. This letter is in response to Shawn Stevens’ naive sermon on sexuality and morality. Her opinion on contraceptives was so scrambled that I won’t even com ment on it. To say that Steve Patti has only his own pleasure in mind may or may not be true. The male race is not always the cause for pre-marital sex. It is a decision made by two people, so there is obviously a mutual want present. If your morals outcast pre marital sex you should be sure enough to say no when the opportunity arises. There are many girls in this country that feel a desire and go with it. To rest the guilt on Steve or all of the “lustful” male population is overstating a fact that guys have less to worry about. When Shawn was in high school she “knew it was wrong to be sexually active” and about “the problems pre-marital sex causes.” Wrong!? Says who? Sex doesn’t cause problems, ignorance does. Shawn also explained that American lifestyle is lusty “because lusty men seek to advance it.” As far as lust goes, it takes two to tango. She asks why there is so much lust in soap operas and advertising. At least two of America’s soaps are writ ten by a woman for a target audience of women. Half of the television ads I see I have but a few words tosaf 1 people who support the squeal you support the squeal law, f# your prerogative. But I alsohop^ willing to have your taxes increas ( ficantly so that welfare checks issued to those unwed mothers* not support themselves and theii mate children. Kids are bombarded with the sex from all angles: television,pe ( ure, movies, magazines, etc. lftl 1, to be sexually active and wanttoi 11 birth control method, (granted nance is the best method), then means, they should be able to do* out the fear of their parents beii 1 fied. I can’t even begin to imagi 1 high the birth rate would soar squeal law is passed. Can you? Jan Grand