2 Opinion
Wednesday, March 6, 1991
The Battalion
Opinion Page Editor Jennifer Jeffus 845-3314
Credit cards let us buy what we can
JL inancial woes have been
a constant throughout my tenure at
Texas A&M.
My many problems have
compounded themselves continually
over the past year and my sheer
stupidity is mostly at fault.
Until recently, pinning the blame on
any one thing was somewhat difficult.
Parties take their toll. My car always
finds a way to self-destruct at the most
inopportune times. The University, no
matter what has been said, overcharges
me for the "convenience" of its dining
facilities and stores.
Lately, a front runner has emerged in
the race to rob me of what little money I
have remaining. Credit cards.
It all started out so innocently. About
a year ago, I received a call from a bank
in California that offered me a Visa
card. The idea of a credit card seemed
scary at first. After all, the only income
I had was what I received from writing
these columns.
The woman on the phone was so
soothing and, after about 10 minutes,
convinced me to accept the card.
Everything sounded great. The card
could be kept for emergency use only.
If I did purchase something on the
card, I could pay the balance at the end
of the month and avoid interest
charges. Best of all, for $20 a year, I
would have credit!
No more than two weeks later, I
received my shiny, new, black Visa
card with a nifty hologram. It seemed
so harmless.
For the next two months, I paid my
balance each time. This credit card
thing is wonderful, 1 thought. It was so
great that I applied for a gas card and a
Discover card.
All of the bills and expenses that I
had postponed for four months started
to roll in at the semester's end. The bills
had to be paid, but there were so many
other things that I needed like some
new compact discs. Hey, they were on
sale. At any rate, I decided that I could
charge all of the things that I wanted
and pay it all back with the money I
would make from my summer job.
That decision has to rank up there in
stupidity with attacking Kuwait, firing
Shelby or parking in a 30-minute zone
on campus for 31 minutes.
By summertime, I had found a new
friend — the minimum payment.
Luckily, the balance on my gas card
had to be paid each month. The Visa
and Discover people were not as kind.
They actually wanted me to pay the
minimum payment.
Now, I find myself in quite a
quagmire. I have decided that I will pay
the friendly folks at Visa back with the
money that I will make when I have a
real job.
Until then, I send them an enormous
check each month to cover the
minimum payment. As a friend of
mine said, it is like investing in my
future. Sadly, that future is
approaching all to slowly.
There is a lesson to be learned here.
First of all, credit cards are not needed
to establish credit. Credit is established
with a job, buying a car or house or
't afford
even repaying a loan.
Second, the bank card people are not
being nice in offering us credit cards.
They are malicious money-hungry
demons. Why do they offer college
students bank cards? Because college
students cannot afford them. This is
because many of us act and purchase
on impulse and only have money for
the minimum payment which
translates to the interest that we owe.
Plus, they know that they will
eventually get their money.
Last of all, for those of you who do
not have a credit card: DON'T GET
ONE! I probably have received at least
10 credit card applications this
semester. (Maybe the Visa people told
them what a profitable client I am).
Every one found a home in the trash.
Credit cards only allow us to buy
things we actually cannot afford.
Matt McBumett is a senior electrical
engineering major.
Mail Call
The Battalion is interested in hearing from its readers and welcomes all letters to the editor. Please include name, classification, address and phone num
ber on ail letters. The editor reserves the right to edit letters for style and length. Because of limited space, shorter letters have a better chance of appearing.
There is, however, no guarantee letters will appear. Letters may be brought to 216 Reed McDonald or sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111.
Examine the facts
EDITOR:
This is in response to Dr. Hovav Talpaz's article in The
Battalion of Feb. 28, in which there were some factual er
rors.
First of all, on commenting on the U.S. Patriot missiles
destroying Soviet-made Iraqi Scud missiles in the recent
gulf war, Talpaz says that "... Russian technology once
again has failed badly in contesting that of the United
States." Conventional wisdom indicates that U.S. technol
ogy is superior to that of the Soviets, but this was a truly
bad example.
The Soviet SS-1C Scud-B surface-to-surface missile was
developed by the Soviets in the early 1950s and was mod
ified from an earlier version, the SS-1B Scud-A, which itself
was just a Soviet version of the German V-2 missiles from
World War II.
The Soviets originally deployed the Scud-B in 1957. In
other words, the Scuds are essentially based on 1940s tech
nology, modified in the 1950s and updated by the Iraqis
with their technology.
Since then, the Soviets have deployed several genera
tions of highly advanced tactical medium range surface-to-
surface missiles (such as the SS-12s, the SS-21s and the SS-
23s) that have not been designated for export.
So in essence, the MIM-104 Patriot missiles, which are
'80s technology were battling against weapons that have
been declared obsolete, even by their makers.
Talpaz's other assertion that only Western countries
have developed anti-missile weapons such as the Patriot
also is incorrect. He writes that the East Bloc never devel
oped such weapons since they could be sure that the West
ern countries would never attack civilian targets, while the
Western countries could never be sure of the reverse.
In fact, no other than the Soviet Union deployed in
1970, 64 Galosh-1 anti-ballistic missile weapons around the
city of Moscow to intercept incoming missiles. Since then,
they have been augmented by newer operational versions
such as the ABM-3 and the SH-4.
In addition, there are several generations of surface-to-
air missiles including the SA-12, which are part of overall
air defense, which includes anti-missile intercepts (just like
the Patriot).
Maybe Talpaz should examine the facts before pro
claiming the inherent superiority of any side. Smugness is
fine, but only when it's supported by factual evidence.
Asif A. Siddiqi
graduate student
Administrators must adopt
wider definition of loyalty
Let's talk about loyalty .
"I have had my loyalty as an Aggie
questioned," Texas A&M Student Body
President Ty Clevenger told the Faculty
Senate on Monday. Clevenger was ref
erring to comments apparently made
by some A&M administrators in re
sponse to the recently-released Student
Government study of the Business
Services Department. The report had in
part questioned the pricing at snack
bars run by Business Services.
Dr. Charol Shakeshaft, head of the
educational administration department
at Hofstra University, presented a lec
ture that same Monday on her recent
research on gender differences in pub
lic school administrators. She dis
cussed supervision and feedback, sex
uality and hiring practices, and finally
— loyalty.
Since the audience had a few under
graduate students and the ideas are
new and stongly buttressed by pub
lished social science research, I will
summarize them here to help clarify
the issue of loyalty that once again has
been brought up in our school.
Male school administrators were
asked to list the qualities they would
want when choosing members of a
team. First on the list was loyalty.
When further questioned, the adminis
trators defined a loyal person as some
one who "doesn't tell what I tell him."
A loyal person keeps secrets.
In answer to the question of how
they would show loyalty to someone
else's team, male administrators re
sponded that they would not share
confidences, would not criticize deci
sions openly; if they disagreed with the
leadership, they would simply seek an
other job rather than show a lack of loy
alty by disagreeing.
Clevenger and Student Government
have run right up against these con
cepts of loyalty. First, they asked ques
tions about the running of part of the
University, asking for information that
loyal employees could not bring them
selves to share. Then they criticized de
cisions openly, a signal offense in this
concept of loyalty. And don't forget,
loyalty is on the top of the list for a
good team member.
By the way, Shakeshaft also dis
cussed the same research among fe
male school administrators. What were
their responses to the same questions?
Loyalty also was on their list as a re-
Mary Ciani
Saslow
Reader’s Opinion
quirement for a team member, but well
down the list. In first place, instead,
was competence. What did "loyalty"
mean to them? Female administrators
responded that loyalty meant doing the
work, doing what you said you would
do, doing it well and doing it on time.
What about the idea that loyalty
meant not talking about decisions?
They responded that they considered it
not only unrealistic but wrong to ex
pect people to hold things in and never
talk about what was going on.
How would they show loyalty as a
team member? For them, loyalty equal
led speaking out. Doing a good job, in
their eyes, required pointing out prob
lems in order to try to solve them. Un
der this definition of loyalty, Clevenger
and the Student Government are acting
loyally toward the University. They are
loyally doing the job required of them,
representing the students, and they are
doing it well. They also are loyally
questioning decisions they think are to
the detriment of the group.
Further, in Shakeshaft's research, it
was found that the best administrators
had good social skills: They interacted
well with others, listened to their con
stituents, used polite speech, did not
interrupt and drew people out. Cle
venger and Student Government, by
this measure, also have acted well.
They listened to their constituents -
the students — and tried to act honor
ably on their legitimate concerns.
As long as the students and the ad
ministrators have such different con
cepts of loyalty, there will be conflict.
Perhaps the wisest way out would be
for the University administrators to
adopt a wider definition of loyalty
which includes discussion, questioning
and debate, and to listen to their con
stituents, including the students. Many
already have adopted this wider frame
work for conflict resolution. Perhaps
others should as well.
Mary Ciani Saslow is a senior lecturer
in architecture.
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Lisa Ann Robertson,
Editor
Kathy Cox, Managing Editor
J ennifer J effus,
Opinion Page Editor
Chris Vaughn, City Editor
Keith Sartin,
Richard Tijerina,
News Editors
Alan Lehmann, Sports Editor
Fredrick D. Joe, Art Director
Kristin North,
Life Style Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup
porting newspaper operated as a commu
nity service to Texas A&M and Bryan-
College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion
are those of the editorial board or the au
thor, and do not necessarily represent the
opinions of Texas A&M administrators,
faculty or .the Board of Regents.
The Battalion is published daily, except
Saturday, Sunday, holidays, exam periods
and when school is not in session during
fall and spring semesters; publication is
Tuesday through Friday during the sum
mer session. Newsroom: 845-3313.
Mail subscriptions are $20 per semes
ter, $40 per school year and $50 per full
year: 845-2611. Advertising rates fur
nished on request: 845-2696.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed
McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col
lege Station, TX 77843-1111.
Second class postage paid at College
Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes
to The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald,
Texas A&M University, College Station
TX 77843-4111.
fhe itch
by Nito
Vi
Suq
toh;
WASH
General ;
Tuesday:
students,
ference tl
where the
the booze
NovelU
running
underage
“Unfor
become s
and bing
pple,” 1
Novell*
ence by
throngs <
years ago
“I wan!
that it is
with regf
said. No
message \
spring’s v
“This i
she said.
Novelh
been bo
ments tl
drinking
passage,
to follow.
She ap
turers an
responsil
keting an
this year’:
She sa
Com
Ker
the U.f
tertcrn
MSi
tion, co
M
HO
MO