Opinion
Universities seek to bypass public with stimulus
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Jim Allard:
- 'Inclusive Excellence' a flawed idea (November 6, 2009)
- UW not acting in 'the public interest' (October 26, 2009)
- Ehrlich lecture an intellectual mess (October 8, 2009)
- Farmers correct on Pollan's blather, wrong on subsidies (October 1, 2009)
- 'In Defense of Food' merely psuedo-intellectual discourse (September 24, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
In last week’s column, I claimed our culture is following a destructive course of pragmatism. This is the view that ideological principles should be discarded in favor of “doing whatever works” to achieve one’s immediate goals. I likened this view to that of a bank robber who pursues his goals while disregarding the means of achieving them. His sole concern is he needs money, and someone else has it.
Examples of this bank robber mentality surface daily, especially since Obama’s promise to redistribute wealth on a massive scale. Through taxing, inflating and borrowing, the savings and earnings of countless Americans will be poured into the pockets of other Americans in the form of “stimulus” loot. And with Mr. Obama holding the purse strings, everyone from banks to car manufacturers to Internet companies are lining up to get a piece of the action.
The
The majority of this ad is devoted to heralding the value of education, the benefits of universities to society and the need for a vision to invest in an “education transformation.” Whatever the merits of these claims, notice this plea is directed at Obama, not the universities’ actual customers: the American people.
In fact, this direct line to Obama was explicitly tailored to exclude everyone who might have a legitimate interest in the matter, namely the taxpayers and their representatives.
“Dollars should not be subject to appropriation by state legislatures,” the letter states. What about the principle of “no taxation without representation?” Don’t get theoretical; just give us the money, please.
“No project-by-project approval in
What about the principle of division of power, and government as the servant of the people? Shouldn’t taxation and legislation be kept close to home where people have control over where their money is spent? According to the letter, allowing state control of funds might be used “as an excuse to reduce budgetary commitments to universities.” (As if universities have an Obama-given right to be funded.)
The universities’ letter to Obama makes abundantly clear the pragmatic, bank robber approach. In the eyes of these authors, the only thing standing between universities and their infrastructure projects is convincing Obama to fork over the cash — all other considerations are dispensable.
Yet, how one achieves a goal is just as important as the goal itself. If one values an education, for instance, one must earn good grades. Receiving a gratuitous “bailout” grade so one can attend grad school is only a pretense of knowledge. To acquire an actual education, one must earn it.
If Obama began handing out college diplomas, it would not alter the fact that a diploma has to be earned to be of value. This principle doesn’t change by replacing diplomas with green pieces of paper with presidents’ faces on them. Just as a diploma is only a value when it represents actual achievement, money is only a value when it represents actual earnings.
If a car manufacturer wishes to be profitable, it must earn the patronage of customers and investors. Putting itself in the black by expropriating taxpayer bailout money is only a pretense of profit.
If a university seeks a well-funded and valued educational system, it must earn the support it receives. Seeking the support of taxpayers while trying to undercut their ability to withhold their support — or even be aware of what they’re supporting — is only a pretense of a valued educational system.
A little over 200 years ago, colonists, protesting the usurpation of power by the king, dumped tea into the Boston Harbor and went on to risk their lives in the name of a single principle: individual rights. These revolutionaries put political principles and ideals above range-of-the-moment goals. They understood any value, such as freedom, must be earned and that this necessitates certain political principles.
Their counterparts today would most certainly accept the king’s growing power in exchange for a share of the loot. Seeking the unearned through unprincipled action has become standard policy today. This is clearly evident in the onslaught of groups running to
But what is true for a bank robber is true for universities, car manufacturers and students: Laying claim to what others have earned without earning it oneself is theft, not actual achievement. Universities should be the first to recognize this.
Jim Allard (jeallard@wisc.edu) is a graduate student in the biological sciences.
6 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Fans of Waits will not be disappointed
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
SPRING SUBLET: 1 bedroom in 2 bedroom at the Aberdeen. Rent negotiable. Email arkramer@wisc.edu
GENTLE WOMEN...THROUGH the lens of Douglas J. Nesbit, newly released book now available for holiday gifts! www.gentlewomen.us
IP hash: e58ccb99
“But what is true for a bank robber is true for universities, car manufacturers and students: Laying claim to what others have earned without earning it oneself is theft, not actual achievement. Universities should be the first to recognize this.”
You just called taxation theft. You just called Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, theft. You just called scholarships theft. Food stamps, child care assistance, theft. You just called many of your fellow students thieves.
IP hash: accbd441
Another nice shrug, Atlas!
IP hash: 1b9dbd0f
“You just called taxation theft. You just called Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, theft. You just called scholarships theft. Food stamps, child care assistance, theft. You just called many of your fellow students thieves.”
I get the feeling that the author might not disagree too much with you there. Thats an opinion that a lot of people hold about government funded programs. While the things you named could be argued to be of benefit to society, as Mr. Allard mentioned its not only the result thats important, its also the method. It takes bravery to point out that something with popular results is gone about in an immoral way.
IP hash: e462bb33
well, 902, I believe that he called the organizations that take the tax money thieves. The people who received the money for welfare, medicare, social security are people buying or just getting fenced goods.
This is pretty much true in the bluntest way. I mean, how many people actually donate their money to the government? The amount that my family lost in taxes is much greater than what my college education costs. I wouldn’t have to rely on scholarships if that money wasn’t taken from our family.
But really, honestly, what else could devaluing the dollar by printing more money, a large amount of income tax, and bailouts (to any kind of buisness) be BUT thieving and fencing goods. It’s just that we abide by it, for some reason.
IP hash: 991dfceb
People who complain about taxes are like ungrateful children.
IP hash: e462bb33
So 7:26, tell me please what exactly does the government provide that a private organization couldn’t do (better at that) besides a military, a police, and a court system?
It strikes me that these functions are not only the only ones that a government could do, but the only ones the government should do. It also strikes me that there are ways to pay for the government without taxes if you limited it to these essential roles.