|
|
|
|
[ Thursday, Feb. 25, 1999 ]
Letters to the Editor
Students steal because food is too expensive
I am writing in regard to the "crackdown" in the HUB eateries. It was stated in the article that the reason students are stealing is because of the way the food venues are set up. Let’s think about this for a second. Are students stealing food just because it’s convenient? I don’t think so. The reason students are stealing a sandwich or eating off their salads before they pay is because of one reason -- the food is too expensive.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the new eatery arrangements and the variety of food choices just as much as anyone else, but come on, that food is ridiculously overpriced. And the sad thing about it is, we don’t have a choice. If students only have 15 or 20 minutes to eat lunch, they don’t have the time to run back to the dorms or downtown before their next class. And most likely, students don’t have a well-balanced array of lunch items of their own to pack, so the only other option is to eat at the HUB. Unfortunately, that is where they will pay an insane amount of money to eat lunch, or they’ll just have to starve.
I’m not saying that it’s OK to steal your lunch. I’m only saying that I can understand why some people do, and I don’t blame them. I’ve stopped eating at the HUB because of these idiotic prices, but I’m fortunate enough to have the time to eat somewhere else. I know other students are not as lucky. So to those vicious, monstrous, life-threatening criminals who are eating food before paying for it, more power to you.
Wendy Lynn Mills
graduate-theatre arts
Affirmative action not only preference
This letter is in response to the letters to the editor from Adam Drake and Steven Markle concerning affirmative action. Since both of the men feel we should get rid of all gender- and race-based preference programs, then I propose we clean house and get rid of all preference programs. Let’s start with the preference that children of alumni get when they apply to this university.
Just because they had the random luck of being born to alumni parents, are they any more deserving of preference in admission and in a scholarship (in all fairness, I know it is not a big scholarship, however it is a preference)? This program is inherently discriminatory against students whose parents did not attend college or went somewhere else.
In addition, let’s get rid the preference program that rewards students for getting high SAT scores. There is a lot of credible research that says the SATs are inherently unfair to people who cannot afford the prep programs that prepare students for the test and to minorities because the test is not norm-referenced for them. The SAT, as I said before, is not a reliable predictor of collegiate success, so let’s get rid of those preference programs because they are not solely merit-based.
Are you starting to get the point? Penn State has a lot of preference programs that are based on pointless and random things, and yet I hear no uproar about these programs. Why is it that when a program does not benefit the white male population it’s called "reverse discrimination?" If we lived in a world without preferences, I would be totally against them -- but we don’t. I am still here at Penn State because of my merits; affirmative (positive) action just got my foot in the door. I have seen both sides of the preference argument. I don’t qualify for any of the programs mention above. However, I see the need for affirmative action and preference programs. Affirmative action does not stand for quotas, it stands for leveling the playing field to help minorities and women compete in a world that is inherently unfair to them.
Kizzy Frey
junior-special education
Send an Opinion Letter to the Editor about this article.
Requested: Friday, September 05, 2008 5:21:31 AM -4
Created: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 6:26:08 PM -4