le Battalion
o
PINION
Page 9 • Tuesday, March 2, 1999
ty taj
rtswil
The price of money in America
allege students without wealth
fcain more benefits than students
ith unlimited monetary resources
Gienn
^JANIIC
amen noo
dles, late
'B. Vrent pay-
Tjents and trips to
plasma depos
itary are the dis-
^Wiguishing marks
of the poor college
^ ■udent.
■ While being a
i.mBpor student may
KOU', depress some, the state of poverty
^any Aggies experience is actually a
isitive force in their education. Stu-
12 cl dents who live in poverty have a
11 Te-'BDmpetitive edge over the sport-utili-
stoCs ■ driving, sun-tanning hordes of fi-
§ sta fSBancially well-to-do.
v sta r * This may sound backwards, but
nd ddBoverty is power. Despite Puff Daddy
(placed aaiming it is “all about the Ben-
s deecT 'ns,” poor students gain invalu-
amssc tide survival skills by fending for
willirMieir own food, shelter and financial
IBell-being.
;d the® The first skill poor students gain is
7-1 iniffie art of budgeting. If Mom and Dad
tansasBrop a grand into Joe Aggie’s account
12 tit!t«very month, the word “budget” be-
NokiaHomes simply a term on an econom-
:o Oliiil it s test.
I For the downtrodden Aggie, how-
199?w er , the budget is a Bible. Allocating
isianaBioney for rent and bills, then trying
>ort, lpi squeeze out money for food and
lias is a delicate and intellectual
Irocess.
I University of Oklahoma student
[ gjjlacheal Scholten has developed a Web
Page to help poor college students con-
m |truct a workable budget. Unfortunate-
. ,. ly, most of her tips are as tasteless as
red tli riiea ^ ess Hamburger Helper.
| ^1 She recommends poor students
’ 7 raC l( fhminate soda and frozen dinners to
^ave money. Scholten also suggests
aying goodbye to Tide, Mrs. Baird’s
nd Kellogg's and saying hello to
leneric products.
While budgeting and cost-cutting
aay sound like a superb skill to pos-
less, it seems that the results — off-
Irand food and tap water — are hard
Atlanta.
itmet
'\rd b
\es Wr
. VdadeJ
i in
&M rei
third t sw all° w - However, when students
Mre forced to live poorly, they learn to
live within their means.
Tqqggl All Aggies have seen the Aber-
• ■ rom t ) ie-adorned masses waltz across
y L p M if am Pus, but when Mom and Dad
Stop the student-welfare, how will
|ch students adjust to being under
paid 20-somethings?
This transition period may lead
some to max credit cards in order to
maintain their college standard of liv
ing. However, if a student was poor
in college, he or she will already be
accustomed to paltry funds.
Being poor in college is also bene
ficial because it does not allow stu
dents to take the easy road. For poor
college students, skipping classes
and attending tutorial services is not
an option, relying on professional re
view services for getting into medical
school is impossible and joining a
Greek organization to build a job net
work is too costly.
Instead, poor students are forced
to rely on their own talents and work
ethic to break down doors that are
held open for well-to-do students.
A lack of money in college teaches
self-reliance — a skill needed to move
into management, start a business or
survive the tough times of the real
world.
The final lesson student poverty
teaches is the art of being humble.
Flaunted wealth in the form of fancy
clothes and cars is an inescapable
American phenomenon.
Perhaps, if students are able to ex
perience life without money, they will
not need to be dressed in gold when
they finally do achieve a better stan
dard of living. Their wealth will not
need to be displayed in the forms of a
fancy house or a $60,000 car.
While poor college students do
face many hurdles that wealthy stu
dents can simply avoid; the meek of
Texas A&M are gaining a competitive
edge everyday they battle to amke
ends meet. The setting of budget in
stead of just buying what one wants
is difficult.
Driving a 1985 Toyota Corolla is
tough when the rest of the crowd is
cruising in $30,000 Tahoes. But
poverty is the force that makes aver
age Americans into great Americans.
The lessons that come with lack of
wealth are the instructions for be
coming successful.
Remember, George Washington,
Alexander Hamilton, Andrew
Carnegie and Ronald Reagan were all
raised in poverty.
Glenn Janik is a senior political
science major.
RUBEN DELUNA/The BATTALION
775-2®]
MAIL CALL
ledia not responsible
lor decline of society
In response to Dave McManus'
■Mar. l mail call.
I have found in the past some-
jnnes it is difficult to smile when
having a picture taken. I would like
-’■"to send my sincere thanks to Dave
l ^(‘McManus, Pastor, Faith Almighty
4^!l ission - for alleviating this problem
me f° r th e rest my , ^ e -
yl fifl ‘The Battalion is a stench in the
; nostrils of God?” What a beautiful,
eloquent, visual metaphor.
I Even if it accomplished nothing
e| se, it makes you sound extremely
open-minded, educated and caring:
important qualities in any pastor. I
am sure that the Almighty enjoys
having references being made to
|is bodily caverns.
Now, I could talk about what a
pnservative you are by not “loving
|e sinner and hating the sin” but
Jpt is pretty overdone as is. In-
g itth stead I would like to point out that
,! Be. as human beings, have this
^amazing power... it is called free
5 That is right, free choice. If you
iJpn’t like a certain picture, don’t
Jcok at it. I know, it seems like a
Ui P'etty simple idea, I believe even
m.-F Preschool children are aware it ex-
■ ,s1;s - So, why did you not grasp the
I ify concept?
Oh wait, it is because you wanted
5 ‘ J° Prove that The Battalion is an “in-
jfgral part" of the “lack of decency
Idii* society” right?
Mfel; There is nothing I enjoy more
jlan listening to people try to pawn
“ ffciety’s problems off on the media,
arcia’s) Is it because the media really is re-
rds Arflr 0ns 'k |e for these problems, or is
i hie l because that person is too lazy
3 ,,ir d apathetic to do anything about
e WeP'lem?
cornel ^hy don’t you spend half as
(/
UiH<) >«>*
>C«1 ^
Th.
144
01
on-iv
i.m-
3xas
much time trying to do something
about these problems as you spend
trying to place blame for them if you
really care about society’s well be
ing?
Scott Trexler
Class of '99
Accompanied by 10 signatures
Competition should
lead to lower prices
In response to Christian Robbins’
Feb. 26 opinion column.
This is in reply to the article “Local
merchants need to stop taking advan
tage of Aggies.” In it, it says that
“students ... are being financially ex
ploited” by businesses. It’s all eco
nomics.
Businesses will charge whatever
price people are willing to pay, be they
college student or any other type of
consumer. The market is blind to in
justice, it simply seeks to satisfy sup
ply and demand.
Why do businesses charge so
much? Because they can. That is
the beauty of our modified free-mar-
ket capitalist economy. Businesses
compete to earn a profit, and the
best businesses survive. Such com
petition will lead to lower prices.
Luke Bolton
Class of '99
Wealth without work just as detrimental to society as
work without wealth, both sides need to find compromise
The Battalion encourages letters to the editor.
Letters must be 300 words or less and include
the author’s name, class and phone number.
The opinion editor reserves the right to edit let
ters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be
submitted in person at 013 Reed McDonald with
a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1.111
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@tamvml.tamu.edu
A growing urban
myth has it that
Bill Gates once
thumbed his nose
rather rudely at Attor
ney General Janet
Reno.
When warned by
Reno that he may be
asked to pay a million
dollar fine each month
for several months. Gates is reputed to
have let out a peal of devilish laughter, af
ter which he replied, with a nerdy twinkle
in his eye: “A million dollars? I make that
much money in two hours.”
Whether or not the story is actually
true does not matter. What matters is how
close to the truth it is.
While it may not be known whether
Gates is actually so affected by his wealth,
what is obvious is the obscene amount of
money Gates and other wealthy individu
als make.
When compared to the salary many
poor workers eke out from day to day, it
becomes obvious that disgusting displays
of decadence coexisting with destitution
are far too common in the world today.
The rich grow richer while the needy stay
needy.
Unfortunately, despite the growing dis
parity between rich and poor around the
world, no one seems willing to claim the
problem as his or her own.
Until both the rich and poor realize
their own unique complicity in the prob
lem, the social gap between wealth and
want will never close.
But because most people persist in
pointing the finger at everyone but them
selves, that gap only seems to widen.
Those who are wealthy tend to blame
poverty on a lack of personal responsibili
ty and initiative among the poor. They in
sist America’s wealthy are not account
able for America’s poor.
If Gates worked for his $18 billion, he
should be able to do what he wants to
with it. It is his money and his business.
Meanwhile, defenders of the poor lay
blame for the situation at the feet of the
super rich.
It is absurd, they say, for one man to
make millions of dollars more than he
needs to live by barely lifting a finger.
Many poor families work long hours
and live by the sweat of their brows. Their
work ought to be rewarded with fair
wages and decent standards of living, in
stead of letting the really rich get need
lessly richer.
In reality, there is truth behind the
complaints of both parties. When faced
with these two extreme and emotionally
charged positions, the answer may be
found in the wisdom of the Hebrew book
of Ecclesiastes, “It is good to grasp the
one and not let go of the other” (Ecclesi
astes 7:18).
Societies can no longer be divided over
the distribution of wealth, because the
“look, it’s my property” view and the
“look at this poverty” view both make
good points.
The injustice each perceives in the op
posing view comes down to the same
problem. It is what Gandhi called a social
sin. It is the problem of wealth without
work.
How one understands Gandhi’s state
ment depends largely on where he or she
stands in relation to others.
On the one hand, those in the top-in-
come brackets tend to believe most poor
people have made their bed and now
must lay in it. They often unfairly carica
ture welfare recipients as leeches on the
backs of the hardworking segments of so
ciety.
To view the poor this way, however,
makes a false generalization. There are
surely some who abuse welfare, and these
people are guilty of acquiring wealth with
out work.
But this dishonest thievery does not ap
ply to all needy people. Many who are tru
ly in need are willing to work hard, but
because of low wages and few job oppor
tunities, they suffer from the travesty of
work without wealth.
On the other hand, it is also unfair to
generalize about the wealthy. There are
those who revel in riches with little con
cern or compassion for those beneath
them, but not everyone who is well off
has a stone for a heart.
Many have worked hard for their for
tunes and have a right to it.
However, more and more members of
society are beginning to see a deep truth
in Gandhi’s commitment to wealth pre
cede by work.
Conservatives can no longer paint lib
erals as selling out taxpayers to undeserv
ing poor, and liberals can no longer paint
conservatives as partial to the rich.
Instead, rich and poor, conservative
and liberal, must recognize wealth with
out work for what it really is — society
without sense.
The poor must make an effort to work
hard to lift themselves out of their plight,
instead of relying too heavily on the work
of others.
The rich must refrain from increasing
their wealth without sharing it with those
below them, instead of growing grossly
rich off the labor of others.
If the way a society distributes its
wealth is going to work, it cannot allow
the existence of wealth without work. It is
a simple truth that has been rarely ob
served in the history of the world, but it
must be observed in the future.
Caleb McDaniel is a sophomore
history major.