[23] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: LIVING WAGE SIT-IN AT HARVARD (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan J. Williams)
Thu Apr 19 11:27:20 2001
To: Zhelinrentice L Scott <zlscott@MIT.EDU>
Cc: mit-talk@MIT.EDU
From: nathanw@MIT.EDU (Nathan J. Williams)
Date: 19 Apr 2001 02:14:10 -0400
In-Reply-To: <200104190548.BAA11769@m4-167-8.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <mtur8yps9fx.fsf@contents-vnder-pressvre.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-From: jhawk@MIT.EDU
Resent-To: mit-talk-mtg@charon.MIT.EDU
Zhelinrentice L Scott <zlscott@MIT.EDU> writes:
> MIT pays a living wage.
Can you back that up with numbers?
As smug as it would make me feel to think that "my" institution is
more liberal-minded than Harvard, I don't actually believe it.
> Blue-collar workers are human. They have a right to food, clothes
> and shelter.
Lots of people don't consider these "rights" but things to be
earned or otherwise struggle to obtain. How is something that 99% of
the people in history have been short of 99% of the time a "right"?
> When you are making barely enough to survive on, when there is money
> that is just collecting interest and making the rich richer that
> makes no sense!
Sure it does. If you spend faster than you make money on your
endowment, you can only pay this "living wage" until the endowment
runs out. If you spend at or below that rate, you can do so
indefinitely. Clearly, in the latter case you can help more people in
the long run. Doesn't it make more sense to take the long view?
Shortsighted attempts at doing good are still shortsighted.
> Why is it that the PUblic Service Center has such a hard time
> getting volunteers(if the average MIT student is so great)?
They're not so great. They're hosed. They also know that their time
here is costing them a lot of money. They'll be able to volunteer for
the rest of their lives, but they'll only be at MIT once.
I know more people who have spent a couple of years in the Peace Corps
than I do who have worked with the PSC, and I think that they made the
right choice.
> Why is that MIT students get all up in arms when someone is about
> to change their living group, and sit by and do nothing
> when the President of the United States makes decisions that
> increase the toxins in our air and water?
1) Because local, immediate causes are more important.
2) Because it appears possible to do something about the former than
the latter.
> Why is it that MIT students, the premiere scientists and engineers of
> the world, have not publicly denounced the terrible abuses of the planet even
> after scientific proof of global warming has been put forward?
MIT students are not "the premiere scientists and engineers of the
world". At best, they're the "the people who will become the premiere
scientists and engineers of the world in a couple of decades".
You make it sound like there's a nice, simple, "Oh, between class at
2:30 and 3 I'm going to go publicly denounce the terrible abuses of
the planet."
> *Have the power to change the world's environment and help
> its people and do nothing
What power is this? They're a bunch of college students. They are not
the respected scientists and engineers of the world. Much better that
they tool harder so that they will be better-respected scientists and
engineers in a few decades and can then make a difference.
I see the MIT education as a lever. Taking time out of your education
to be an activist on non-local causes is merely shortening your lever
in the future - hardly a good tradeoff.
> Let's talk about the extremely apathetic, selfish, mean MIT student
> who thinks Profits are more valuable than people.
That's a complicated moral and philosophical question. It's totally
offensive for you to claim that you have the answers to the world's
questions and can judge everyone else by them.
> It's extremely ironic that ppl have the opinion that these ppl at Harvard
> will cause undue burden on the budget. Especially after the number
> one thing that ppl like about MIT is the people that they meet.
Let's talk about MIT students who are too lazy to spell complete
words. What kind of effect are they going to have on world opinion?
Not much. Rhetoric goes over much better with impeccable spelling and
grammar.
- Nathan
