Newsgroups: ont.general
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!tjhorton
From: tjhorton@csri.toronto.edu (Tim Horton)
Subject: Re: CUT TO THE FAT
Message-ID: <8810240027.AA06108@oconnor.csri.toronto.edu>
Organization: University of Toronto, CSRI
Distribution: ont
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 88 20:27:10 EDT

jimb@watcsc.uucp (Jim Boritz) writes:
>It is extremely disappointing to see that [some] people have resorted to
>petty tactics in order to criticize Mr. Hubbs.  Are we to understand that...

>Underfunding is a serious issue.  It deserves serious consideration.
>It certainly does not deserve to trivialized by ridiculing its proponents.

I agree, it ("underfunding" if you will call it that) is a serious issue.
Myself, I objected to a few empty statements presented as some sort of prime
motivation for lots of angry people to get out placards and yell slogans.
That presentation was either not serious or not responsible, or so it seemed
to me;  Propoganda is not a prime ingredient of serious consideration.


>I am disappointed that those that have reaped the benefits of the public
>education system would begrudge said system to others.

Begrudging?  Are we assumed to be against, if we're not *all* for?
How far over backwards do we have to bend?  Til we break our collective
fiscal backs?  Who'll get an education then?

Or can we just keep going merrily further into debt, and it won't catch up
with us?  What's going to happen here?  Everybody seems to be yelling for
money now, in the short term.  Why should we ignore the slightly longer-term
implications?

Certainly we *should* have a great educational system.  We *should* have
good health care.  We *should* have good day care.  We *should* have all
sorts of social programs, and on and on...  But *can* we afford everything
that *should* be?

(I *should* jog, and eat right, and read more, and do significantly more
for others, and sleep better, but *can* I cover all these *shoulds*?
Something has to give.)

If we pump universities full of money, where do we take it from?  What else
is going to suffer?


>There are more students in our universities today than there were a few years
>ago.  The level of funding has not kept pace with this increase.

Has the level of funding *available* kept pace with the increase?

How do we define "Funding", "Overfunding", and "Underfunding"?  By the levels
we were able to maintain decades ago when we had much lower fiscal demands
from other social programs, and the fiscal pie was continuously expanding?

Perhaps you would opt for less money to the hospitals?  Perhaps less to
daycare?  What do you think?


One last note of some relevance.  I've seen a few of the universities
represented on this network pursue some questionable uses of cash.  Like
buildings with 50% circulation space, like multi-million dollar budgets to
keep the place looking like a park, like enormous expenditures on computer
hardware, and software development that universities are neither intended nor
funded for (Waterloo).  Like buying a Cray, like a big-budget research focus
at the expense of undergrad programs, like extraordinarily bad multi-million
dollar library projects (Toronto).

Me, I'm happy to be here in school, while the fat is still available.  I ain't
complaining, and I certainly don't think there's cause to!  What we *don't*
need is substitution of emotion and propoganda for responsible justification.

If there's something to ask for, please be prepared to justify it.  Especially
if the pricetag ends in 8 or 9 zeros.
