2008 Woodie Awards
There is no such thing as free lunch
Letter to the editor
Issue date: 1/30/08 Section: Opinion
Apparently, free lunch costs approximately a buck and a half. I'm glad we finally got that straightened out and can now move on to other things like those mentioned in Evan Wynn's letter in the Jan. 23 issue.
He rightly addresses the issue of $16,000 going to pay for flowers in the Capitol Building, but rather than protesting such use of funds, he uses that as an argument for paying for the lunch program.
We pay taxes under the assumption that the money will go to provide the general public with services we think people should get, allowing for the fact that not everyone will use all of the services. However, just because we all won't use some things doesn't give the government free reign to spend however much they want on whatever they want. If Rep. Nancy Pelosi wants flowers, she can pay for them with her own money.
I have no doubt UW-Whitewater and other universities are similarly wasteful, and my tuition is probably going toward many things I wouldn't like.
Since when does that mean I have to sit back and take it? I'm supposed to give up my money and be done with it? If I don't like what my taxes or my tuition is spent on, I have both the right and responsibility to question it. Maybe my objections won't have an effect, but just maybe they will.
Perhaps Wynn is glad his taxes help pay for my education among many other things. That's great; more power to him. However, the idea that all of us have to be satisfied with the status quo is ridiculous. It's not a selfish "no money for stuff I won't use" thing; it's a democratic "I'm part of it so I have a voice" thing.
A dollar and fifty cents may seem a small price to pay, but it adds up. Just think of the amount of free lunch we could have if we had a little more money in our pockets and a little less crap (I'm looking at you National Endowment for the Arts).
Patience Bruce
UW-Whitewater junior
He rightly addresses the issue of $16,000 going to pay for flowers in the Capitol Building, but rather than protesting such use of funds, he uses that as an argument for paying for the lunch program.
We pay taxes under the assumption that the money will go to provide the general public with services we think people should get, allowing for the fact that not everyone will use all of the services. However, just because we all won't use some things doesn't give the government free reign to spend however much they want on whatever they want. If Rep. Nancy Pelosi wants flowers, she can pay for them with her own money.
I have no doubt UW-Whitewater and other universities are similarly wasteful, and my tuition is probably going toward many things I wouldn't like.
Since when does that mean I have to sit back and take it? I'm supposed to give up my money and be done with it? If I don't like what my taxes or my tuition is spent on, I have both the right and responsibility to question it. Maybe my objections won't have an effect, but just maybe they will.
Perhaps Wynn is glad his taxes help pay for my education among many other things. That's great; more power to him. However, the idea that all of us have to be satisfied with the status quo is ridiculous. It's not a selfish "no money for stuff I won't use" thing; it's a democratic "I'm part of it so I have a voice" thing.
A dollar and fifty cents may seem a small price to pay, but it adds up. Just think of the amount of free lunch we could have if we had a little more money in our pockets and a little less crap (I'm looking at you National Endowment for the Arts).
Patience Bruce
UW-Whitewater junior
Be the first to comment on this story