PAGE 2
TIIE TWIG
FEBRUARY 22. 1M2
THE TWIG
msns^ith cdkgp
RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA 27611
Editor-in-chief
Senior Reporters
Staff Reportei^
Columnist
Business Manager
Layout Editor
Layout Staff
Photographer
Advertising Manager
Advertising Staff
Sports
Circulation Managers
Copyediting
Proofreading
Faculty Advisors
Lori Howell
Lisa Sorrels.
Linda Sellers.
Chrissy Murphrey. Shirene Hritzko.
Emily Craig. Lauren Starboard
Kathleen McKeel.
Lauren Worthington
Carolyn Dunn
Kathleen McKeel
Yvonne Sjamaar,
Faith Wells
Leta Hubbard
Cinda Badford
Sarah Walker. Beth Knox
Molly McGee
Catherine McLeod.
Stephanie Prevatte
Joanne Carswell,
Jenny Barker. Dannie Ward
English 358
Mr, Bill Norton,
Dr. Thomas Parramore,
Dr. Donald Samson
The TWIG welcomes comment and will give prompt
consideration to any criticisms submitted in writing and
signed by the writer.
Spring Fever symptoms
Guest Editorial
NCSU not
all that bad
I have finally decided that NCSU is not all that bad. (This
decision has been a long time coming since I am a “Born and
Bred” Chapel Hillian.) In fact, the more time I spend at State, the
more I realize that it provides many more opportunities than
partying. I have taken three courses at NCSU through the
Cooperating Raleigh Colleges (CRC) program and one course in
summer school, all of which were an exciting learning
experience, both academically and socially. It is really nice to be
involved in class discussions with both males and females.
Somehow the discussion takes a more realistic turn when there is
a male opinion interjected here and there. Also, at NCSU the
student population is quite diverse. There are many married,
“older than college age." and international students who bring
interesting experiences and a wide range of backgrounds into the
classroom. For me, NCSU courses have a distinct flavor of their
own. This flavor and the change of surroundings has helped me to
‘‘broaden my horizons," as they say.
There are many fringe benefits to taking a course at State
which some Meredith students may not know about. My NCSU
registrationcard entitles me to the following: l) use of library, 2)
intercollegiate athletic events, 3) use of University Student
Center, 4) membership in Friends oi the College. 5) use of
University Infirmary. 6) use of Student Supply Store, and 7) other
University facilities, services, and programs. Of course, I do not
need to remind you that classes and these fringe benefits provide
some of the best and most natural ways to meet guys! There are a
few more "bennies" to be gained from attending State such as the
two or more mile walk to campus and back, the incentive to wear
makeup and "real” clothes, and the will power to avoid stopping
at Swenson's!
It just seems a shame to me not to take advantage of one of
the best universities in the country (in Agriculture and
Engineering anyway) when we are one mile down the road. I
encourage you to look into the CRC pr^ram, which also allows
you to take courses at the other four Raleigh colleges. It is not
difficult to find a course offered at NCSU that is not offered at
Meredith. Be adventurous and take an introductory course in
Aerospace Engineering or Soil Science! Of course, I went for the
less threatening courses like Speech Communications.
Psychology, and P.E.,but next semester I am going to really go
for it and take Weight Training, which has an eight to one male -
female ratio!
If you are interested in becoming a part-time lady
Wolfpacker, just grab a NCSU catalogue and start hunting! The
rest is a matter of paperwork and waiting in line.
Kellie Farlow
LETTERS?
The Twig welcomes letters to the editor and
contributions of columns to the editorial pages.
All contributions should be typed, double spaced, and are
subject to editing.
Column writers should include their majors and
hometowns; each letter should include the writer’s name,
address, and telephone number.
Unsigned letters will not be orinted.
by Lauren F. Worthington
Well folks, the rush is on.
We’ve had a couple of days of
warm weather so everyone is
in the “Prepare for Spring"
rut. Practically every girl on
campus is going to begin a
diet, tomorrow. 1 can see it
now. The soup diet, the salad
diet, the desert diet, the
popcorn and pizza diet. You
name the diet and some
woman at Meredith will go on
it tomorrow. Hundreds of
formal dresses have already
been tried on. ‘‘Maybe if 1
change the neckline and lose
twenty pounds, I can use this
one again..." (Then comes a
totally different problem;
‘‘He's only a half-inch taller
than I am! '
am! Does ANYBODY have a
pair of cute flats?!") Even
though it is still February, it is
already impossible to
traverse the breezeway
between twelve and two
o'clock.
Classes are already a
little emptier and the girls
that do make It to class have
far away looks in their eyes.
As folks get into the
preliminaries of their tans,
complaints about body bulges
can be heard. Halls become
lined with women doing
situps, leg raises, and
stretching into numerous
other uncomfortable
positions. So Spring’s atmut
here and everyone’s doing the
basic spring stuff that gets
done every year. So get
original and come up with
some new spring fever
symptoms of your own. Here
are a few ideas to get you
going:
1) Air out your duck'shoes So
they’ll be ready by April
Shower time.
2) Go funky. Buy one of those
wonderful metallic head
bands and wear it with your
camouflage pants.
3) Dangle a prism in your
window. (I was going to say
‘‘Paint a rainbow on your
ceiling” but a prism will be
cheaper.)
4) Adopt a fuzzy worm.
They always get stepped on!
The Balancing Act
by Michael W. Rosen
A Presidential Exchange
Executive during the Carter
administration, Mr. Rosen
currently is an independent
consultant on political
economics and business
finance. He also hosts a radio
talk show on station KNUS in
Denver. (c> Public Research.
Syndicated, 1982
Frightened by the
prospect of record budget
deficits, many Congressional
Republicans are having
second thoughts about the tax
cut program they supported
so strongly last year. This
comes as no surprise. Aher
ail. what good Republican can
resist the call for a balanced
budget? It’s the old time
religion.
In today's economic
environment, however, a
headlong rush toward budget
balance could be an economic
disaster. If it attempts to
produce that balance by
substantially increasing tax
revenues, the neo-balanced-
budget movement will
produce not a balanced budget
but a depression. From our
starting point in 1982, progress
toward budget balance will
have to be made on the
spending side, with a large
measure of help from greater
than anticipated real
economic growth. Even after
the “massive” Reagan
spending cuts, federal
spending will still grow at .a
rate of 8.5 percent between
fiscal 1981 and 1984.
Unquestionably, we’ve
inherit^ a lousy economic
situation. But this may be our
last chance for a responsible
long-term solution as opposed
to the traditional political
quick-fix. We've got to
address the deficit problem
dispassionately and not let it
panic us into seemingly
expedient but bad fiscal
policy.
The liberals who have
suddenly become born-again
budget balancers are, to
paraphrase David Stockman,
wheeling around a Trojan
horse. By advocating higher
tax rates to allegedly balance
the budget, they seek, really,
to perpetuate higher spending
levels. Their real objective is
to maintain the power of
central government and its
agents in Washington.
As they have emerged
from the legislative process,
the Reagan income tax rate
reductions do little more than
offset bracket-creep. Social
Security taxes continue to
increase, and while real taxes
on income won’t go up, they
won't go down either. To
compromise the Reagan tax
rate cuts now would be to
increase real tax rates from
current levels. Even
Keynesian economists have
never supported such a policy
itf a recession.
If Reagan were to back off
on the tax rate cuts in an
illusive quest for a balanced
budget in an environment of
reduced incentives, he would
only succeed in retarding the
economic recovery and losing
his credibility. He would lose
his image of forcefulness and
hopelessly confuse the public
on what his economic
recovery program is all about.
It would be a classic
Carteresque waffle. And an
absolute disaster.
As for the deficit
projections through 1984, the
bidding war has only just
begun, This will be the
principal ploy of the liberal
opposition. It’s an issue they
feel the pbulic can easily,
although incorrectly, grasp
(i,e,, it fits on a bumper
sticker). Unfortunately, this is
red herring. Not surprisingly,
Alice Rivlin and her band of
"non-partisan" Keynesians at
the Congressional Budget
Office came up with even
more frightening deficit
projects than David Stockman
at the Office of Management
and Budget. Alice "called
David's $610 billion in fiscal
’82 and raised him a
hundred." As a believer in the
virtues of big government,
Ms. Rivlin has the same
objective as the rest of the
President’s liberal critics. In
fact, estimating future budget
deficits is a highly political art
with elements of th& occult.
Nobody has any idea what
GNP or revenues will be if the
economy really takes off.
When we start believing our
own econometric forecasts,
we’ll be beyond help.
Using the recently leaked
0MB working figures
(showing a deficit of as much
as $160 billion in fiscal year
1984), the deficit would be
something like 3.3 percent of
GNP in 1982 and right around
4 percent in 1983 and 1984. This
isn’t good, but it's not the end
of the world and not
unprecedented. In 1976 the
U.S. federal deficit was more
than 4 percent of GNP. In 1968
and 1975 it exceeded 3 percent
of GNP. Japan’s 1979 deficit
exceeded 5 percent of her
GDP. If we can finance our
deficit out of a growing pool of
private savings-as the
Japanese do-rather than
through money creation, we
can mitigate the inflationary
consequences. A balanced
budget is not an end unto
itself. How one attempts to
balance the budget matters.
The Soviet Union has a
balanced budget.
More important than the
deficit are other good things
which could be happening by
1984. The two key
measurements which will
herald the success or failure
of the Reagan economic
program are: 1) Federal
spending as a percentage of
GNP and 2) Tederal receipts
as a percentage of GNP. If
Uiese start coming down, our
other economic problems may
be in the process of solving
themselves.
None of the underlying
principles have changed since
the 1980 campaign. The goals
and the strategy are still the
same. Sticky interests rates
and a highly regionalized
recession have changed some
of the numbers and increased
the political pressure for the
appearance of “doing
something," We’re already
doing something. By bringing
down tax rates we’ve set in
motion the forces of incentive
which will produce the desired
economic results. Now we've
got to get serious about
federal spending.
The danger is that we’ll
get lost in the details and the
deluge of numbers (the
Stockman Syndrome). The
problem is much simpler than
it seems. The real issue is (he
size of government!
Everything else, while
important, is only secondary.
As Milton Fridman says,
"Over emphasis on whether
government spending is
financed by above-board
taxes or concealed taxes in the
form of borrowing or inflation
tends to divert attention from
the basic issue which is to
reduce the government drain
upon the economy’s
resources,’’ As Friedman
observes, it’s better to have a
$100 billion deficit at a level of
federal spending of $400
billion, than to have a
balanced budget at a $700
billion level.
In Great Britain, Mrs.
Thatcher, with the best of
intentions, has been unable to
arrest the advance of
government spending. This
had made the rest of her fiscal
and monetary policies
fruitless. Therein lies her lack
of success. It’s the very
mistake the Reagan
administration must avoid.
It's especially important,
now, that the President's long
time supporters stay with
him, I sympathize with
Reagan loyalists, both
Republican and Democrat,
who will be running for
reelection in 1982. But this is a
lime for courage, conviction,
and faith in the power of our
market economy and
individual initiative. If we
revert to election-year politics
as usual, we’ve blown what
may be our last chance.