Ashley Laing

To the Editor:

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on To the Editor:
Apr 212004

Michael Klein’s letter to the editor glorifying the position

that Reaganomics led to the ’90s expansion brought to mind Albert

Einstein’s book “Ideas and Opinions,” particularly the section

entitled “Why Socialism?”

In the section, Einstein not only lays out his support of

Socialism, but also lays out the argument as to why such a

“non-expert” as himself should be allowed to speak about economics.

His first point is that, “The discovery of general laws in the

field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that

observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors

which are very hard to evaluate separately.”

Here Einstein shows more understanding of economics than Klein

and Brian Zimpfer, who wrote a letter on Tuesday, do. Sure, things

like tax breaks and other stimuli can take years to work due to the

money multiplier effect, but to attribute economic performance to

the president who was in office a decade earlier would be a gamble

and is debated among economists, but it is far away from the views

of “most economists,” as Klein would have your readers believe.

Would Klein have us believe that Bush senior’s two recessions

were due to Jimmy Carter? Most good economists list numerous

factors to the ’90s expansion, such as the emergence of

multi-billion dollar Internet commerce, increased worker

productivity and increased global competitiveness. Neither Reagan

nor Clinton invented the Internet, nor did they cause domestic

economic problems in Japan and Germany. This reductionism is

economics at its worst, as these oversimplified models are used to

justify solely political views.

Anonymous Author

Senior, Economics and Sociology

To the Editor:

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on To the Editor:
Feb 102004

The barrage of letters that The Collegian has received about the academic bill of rights can only be for one reason: the bill stinks. This bill represents a repressive action that is being mulled around the Colorado State Capitol Building and could soon become law.

A political party, with a political agenda, is again calling into question the views of non-partisan professionals with strict codes of ethics. Few civilian institutions have the ethical strictness that teaching and journalism do, so why is one political party so moved to point fingers? Members of these institutions strive to unmask the blinds of everyday life in order to reveal the truth.

The first Republican to chastise the “liberal media” was the infamous ethicist Richard M. Nixon. Since then, the Republicans have been foaming at the mouth any time a liberal commentary is made. I move that the conservatives’ fear is not the fear of a biased classroom or a biased media, but the fear of being proven wrong. What does it say about reality when the professionals being paid to study and know the truth generally agree that the liberal perspective is better for our society?

Conservatives laud a limited government yet beg for more government intervention when it suits their politicized cause. This hypocrisy will not abet truth.

If you are conservative, try to not be so threatened. If your word is true, it will be heard. Our search for truth can only be aided by freedom to think and act how we please. Conservatives, if you are so secure about yourselves, you don’t have to force people to act a certain way. If you are so just, you don’t need to feel so threatened.

Anonymous Author

Senior, sociology and economics