| OCR Text |
Show o PAGb" 6 w NION THURSDAY 1/13 Daily Utah Chronicle THE 7UE UMtTrlD STATES TOTHE EDITOR Students don't have enough computers for their $80 per semester Editor: Is anybody else as concerned about the recent closing of the EMCB computer lab as I.am? By my estimates, EMCB had more than 170 computers before it closed in late December. The shutdown of the lab represents a loss of about one-third of student computer capacity. Queues for student computers are already too long. We need more computers, not fewer. A total of 17,282 (full-time equivalent, 2004) undergraduates pay about $80 per semester for a computing fee. That means the U takes in about $1.4 million to operate 500 student computers. Since closing the EMCB lab, the administration takes care of a scant 330 student computers. That's about $4,100 per computer, per semester. We're paying serious dough for a tiny amount of computers. Word on the street is that a new "computer lounge" will open in the basement of the Union. We don't need funky couches, lattes and dumb-terminal Internet access. We need an ocean of boring computer desks with enough computing capacity to meet the homework demands of our classes. There is another problem here: The Chronicle is the only place to voice concern. Labs are operated under a confusing bureaucracy. No employee could actually give me a name, address, or title of who needs to be made aware of this grievance. President Young, axe you listening? Students, gear up for long waits at the computer labs. If the first day of school was any indication of what the labs are like without homework due, then we'll spend a lot of time standing in line. Kyle LaMalfa Senior, Economics is completely wrong. He didn't beat anyone, so why print such ridiculous statements? Yes, there were "some" violations, not "every one." The infractions are public record on the NCAA Web site. I've read the document pertaining to the case, and you're grossly exaggerating the record. Although I don't condone Majerus' behavior on some levels, and while your comments may sound funny to most, I think they could be considered borderline slanderous and thus maintain that an apology is warranted. Brooke Smith Alumna '89 his semester marks a first for U students campuswide: The first chance Utes have to buy, sell and exchange their textbooks at a location other than the U Bookstore. With the introduction of Beat the Bookstore, a university-oriented bookstore that aims to sell all the textbooks students could ever need, located near campus on the corner of 1300 East and 200 South, the U is now in a unique position where its students can scout for the best prices, compare competitive deals and make the decisions that can best benefit their pocketbooks. Despite what the university bookstore may say, this new situation is inherently beneficial for a number of reasons. First, the introduction of a new bookstore, in and of itself, does not necessarily mean that the U Bookstore will lose massive amounts of business. Therefore, the complaint that this business is going to ruin the bookstore is not objectively true. Yes, it is commonly held among students that the U Bookstore's prices are too steep, so potentially they may take their business elsewhere now that they have the opportunity to do so. If the managers at the U's bookstore see this happening, however, they are more than welcome to reduce their prices to stay competitive. As such, they can work to retain their business. This would be mutually beneficial to both the bookstore and to students, because students could retain the convenience of shopping right on campus for their textbooks, thus bringing their business to the bookstore, while also enjoying the benefits of reduced costs. While the opening of Beat the Bookstore does not necessarily mean a decline in the U's Bookstore business, there is a good chance that students will start taking their business elsewhere now that they can. It is a simple scenario: When one store offers cheaper prices for the same wares, in nearly the same location, there is little reason not to shop there. It's a basic principal of commodity exchange that competition benefits consumers. And, since U students are textbook consumers, this logic applies directly. The question becomes, then, can students expect to save money by shopping at Beat the Bookstore? Anecdotal evidence says yes. Surveys of students who have shopped and exchanged books at Beat the Bookstore indicate that there is indeed the potential to save—in some cases even make—money in this fashion...which is excellent news for students. The monopoly over our business that the U Bookstore has overseen for so long is coming to an end and it looks as though this change in the guard holds great prospects for students. Simply put, we need textbooks. We as students are required to obtain them in order to satisfy our academic responsibilities. To charge students an arm and a leg for things we are required, by the same institution that overcharges for them, is both paradoxical and blatantly unfair. Although the U Bookstore is useful, it no longer gets to enjoy the cushion created by being the only one of its kind. If the U Bookstore wishes to retain its position as king of the bookstores, then it is likely going to need to change its policies and prices in order to stay competitive. No matter how the scenario plays out—regardless of whether or not Beat the Bookstore proves itself capable of making a real impact on the book-buying trade—the point here is that students are the ones who are set to benefit. Unsigned editorials reflect the majority opinion of The Daily Utah Chronicle Editorial Board. Editorial columns and letters to the editor are strictly the opinions of the author. The forum created on the Opinion Page is one based on vigorous debate, while at the same time demanding tolerance and respect. Material defamatory to an individual or group because of race, ethnic background, religion, creed, gender, appearance or sexual orientation will be edited or will not be published. Huntsman has done nothing commendable his first two weeks Slander of Majerus deserves an apology Editor: Regarding your editorial ("Talkin' Giac and layin' smack'Oin the Jan. 12 opinion section, I agree with you in terms of the needed support for coach Giacoletti. I take great exception to the unfair and inaccurate assessment of former coach Rick Majerus, however. Now you know what rights you have as a journalist more so than me. I'm positive that you also have the responsibility to be accurate. Yes, Majerus' eating habits were legendary, big newsflash there. But for you to imply that he "beat people over the head" or that he "violated every NCAA infraction possible..." VIEW Pass go, head directly for Beat the Bookstore T NEW STATE QUARTERS LETTERS CHRONICLE'S Editor: Let's not be too eager to drown our new governor's supposed "mandate" in praise because of his simple decision to respectfully not take a bribe from the new owner of Envirocare. RuthAnne Frost (in Jan. u's "Huntsman: Waste not, want not on Envirocare") proposes the governor has "proven his political integrity" by not doing something that was unethical. This commendable action is not the only thing Gov. Huntsman has done in his first two weeks on the job. Many well-respected and competent state employees received the boot via group e-mail without an exit interview or a thank you. This action, even while it was necessary for his new economic vision, is inexcusable. Huntsman has also an- nounced, expectantly, that he will strive to repeal corporate income tax and capital gains. Nearly $300 million in revenue is earmarked for public and higher education. Huntsman has yet to announce a plan to replace these funds. The governor didn't receive my vote in November, and he hasn't received my vote of confidence. Jennifer Reed Senior, Psychology The defenders of marriage are at it again The Utah Legislature will tackle no-fault divorce in 2005 T he year 2004 was a year of tremendous significance. The Boston Red Sox finally won the World Series, Spain suffered a terrible terrorist attack, George W. Bush was re-elected, the "Star Wars" trilogy was finally released on DVD and "Fahrenheit 9/11" shattered the box office ticket sales record for a documentary film. For those who genuinely believe that a culture war is taking place, or that a nefarious homosexual agenda is being promulgated, the outlawing by 11 states of gay marriage was truly a victory in 2004. Yes, Antonin Scalia, Rick Santorum and our own Orrin Hatch can now choose any one of 11 states (including Utah) in which they can live free of the threat to their own heterosexual marriage by homosexual marriage. Nor do they have to worry about, as Santorum apocalyptically warned, "the slippery-slope" of gay marriage leading to (in Santorum's eloquent words) "man-on-child or man-on-dog." Thank you, valiant protectors of heterosexual marriage! Homosexuals aren't the only ones, apparently, who have been affected by the conservative outrage at the potential violation of the sanctity of marriage. Britney Spears obviously recognized that marriage was so holy that she got married twice in 2005 (one of which lasted all of 55 sanctified hours), Jennifer Lopez entered into her third marriage this past year, which, by conservative logic, must make her three times more holy than all of you monogamous, married-for-life folks. It will be interesting to see how long marriage continues to be at the top of the agenda for religious rightwingers of the Republican Party. Here in Utah, the protection of marriage is being nobly carried forth by Peggy Wallace, R-West Jordan. Wallace has introduced legislation that would make no-fault divorce a thing of the licentious past. Divorces are too easy to obtain for couples when things get hard be- Andrew Cannon Columnist cause the shame in divorce has been eliminated through no-fault divorce, according to Wallace. Though not a single gay marriage threatened a heterosexual Utah couple, an amendment banning it was passed. Will supporters of Amendment 3 have the moral consistency to support Wallace's legislation, which aims at something that really threatens to break up traditional marriage? Don't misunderstand me; I'm against any such legislation. But I Here in Utah, the protection of marriage is being nobly carried forth by Peggy Wallace, R-West Jordan. Wallace has introduced legislation that would make no-fault divorce a thing of the licentious past. also voted against Amendment 3.1 think people should have the right to be with whomever they love regardless of race, religion or sex. I also believe that the right to get out of such a relationship, for what- . ever reason an individual deems important, should be recognized as legitimate. If, in 2004, you rabidly defended "traditional" marriage from the encroaching "pink menace," then show some ideological consistency and courage and support Wallace's legislation. If you see the folly in protect- PLEASE SEND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR TO LETTERS@CHRONICLE.UTAH.EDU ing marriage by forcing unhappy couples to stay together, then let Rep. Wallace know (you can e-mail her at pwallace@utcUi.gov), And don't forget to contact your own representative. Maybe this year, we can wise up about marriage, and let people marry who they love and end it when they want. Maybe this year, as the final "Star Wars" prequel is released, we*ll recognize gay marriage and no-fault divorce for what they are: a phantom menace. letters@ chronicle.utah.edu |
