4
University Daily Kansan / Friday, January 24, 1992
OPINION
Myopic protectionism hurts sagging U.S. car industry
I was slipping through the channels one night during Christmas break when I alighted on a truly hideous sight: Lee Iacocca whining on C-Span. Yes folks, the recession has lowered the once-proud head of Chrysler to moaning and jabbing about those evil Japanese automakers. In fact, all of the so-called Big Three car manufacturers went with George Bush to Tokyo to "get tough" with the Japanese against unfair trade sanctions against U.S. imports.
Showing record auto sales losses and laying off thousands of workers, all that GM, Chrysler and Ford could do was talk about how terrible the competition had been.
In response to the complaining from Detroit, certain politicians and would-be politicians have been doing some whining of their own. Take Patrick Buchanan, the ultra-conservative columnist turned-presidential-hopeful. He would implement a policy of isolationism under the slogan "America F.rst" that effectively would muscle foreign competition out of the U.S. market
Although Bush does not seem to share the extreme sentiments of his party mate Buchanan, his kowtowing to the Three from Detroit clearly puts him in the protectionist camp.
Kevin Bartels
Staff columnist
That seems somewhat ironic because one of the joys of capitalism that Bush is forever touting is — surprise, surprise — a free-market economy.
And yes, Japan's trade sanctions have been unfair. But so what? Even if Japan completely opened its doors to U.S. automakers, it would still not save Detroit from itself. In fact, Japan has agreed to substantially increase the number of U.S. imports, but such a concession will not bring back those heady days when Detroit controlled the U.S. car and truck market much as American Telephone & Telegraph Co. once dominated the telephone system. Unless Chrysler, Ford and GM can convince the consumer that an American car means a better buy, the preferred cars will continue to be Japanese imports.
Another small issue the Big Three would have everyone forget, including certain myopic politicians and our
own President, is that a significant number of Japanese cars are produced right here in the good o'L U.S. of A. Protectionism à la Buchanan, or even George Bush, would do nothing but cripple an already sagging economy. Would the Big Three put even more people out of work than already are unemployed? But that doesn't seem to be a priority for them.
True or not, the popular perception continues to be that Japanese cars provide better performance than U.S. cars. All the whining in the world won't change that. Perhaps the Japan-bashing Iacoca could learn a lesson from his competitors: Japanese CEO's make about one-fifteenth of Iacoca's salary. How many jobs could have been saved by a pay cut for the Big Boss himself? For now, though, the rule for the U.S. consumer seems to remain "caveat emptor." Let the buyer beware.
And while I'm handing out warnings, let me add that we all ought to beware of whiny executives and their lackeys in government who would place the United States economy in an even worse situation than the present one.
- Kevin Bartels is a Louisville, Ky., graduate student majoring in English.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Plan may threaten nightlife
Lawrence City Commission considers ordinance that could limit misbehavior of bar patrons
The Lawrence City Commission has proposed a city ordinance that would hold private club and drinking establishment owners responsible for their patrons' behavior outside, as well as inside, their establishments. The ordinance proposal came after nearly six months of deliberation among commissioners, bar owners and concerned neighbors who have been complaining about damages to their property by bar patrons.
However, the ordinance contains vague language and sets no specific boundaries for the neighborhoods that could file a complaint against a drinking establishment. The ordinance does set a limit of three municipal violations in a year before the establishment can have its license suspended or revoked. Violations include overcrowding and serving underage drinkers.
Ken Wallace, owner of the Jayhawk Cafe, 1340 Ohio St., said local bar owners felt like "dolphins caught in a tuna net," because they were bearing the blame for clubs that had prompted the ordinance.
The ordinance is meant to send a message to bar owners, telling them to shape up or ship out. By limiting late-night activities for bar and club patrons, primarily students, an ordinance such as this one spells imminent doom for some bars, and it has others concerned. The ordinance may prompt changes such as higher cover charges, higher age limits and a host of other possibilities. None of these would benefit the majority of students and other patrons. If the neighborhood complaints about a certain establishment continue, doors might be shut.
To counter this ordinance and ensure residents have places to go to for nightlife, patrons of these establishments must police themselves and those in their company. If we do not, the police and the City Commission will respond and leave students with no place to go.
Criminals need free speech
J. R.Clairborne for the editorial board
Convicts should be able to keep money earned by telling stories describing their crimes
describing their crimes
The recent decision by the Supreme Court to overturn New York's "Son of Sam" law was an overdue restoration of the criminal's right to free speech. The New York law, and similar laws in 41 other states, required criminals to forfeit earnings from speeches or writings about their crimes to the victims of the crimes.
The New York law was broader than most in that it also applied to anyone who had been accused of a crime or admitted in the work that he or she had committed a crime. The court found that the New York law was too broad because it would have mandated payment for works such as "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" and the "Confessions of St. Augustine."
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in writing
the opinion for the court, said that the state of New York "does not assert any interest in limiting whatever anguish (the criminal's) victims may suffer from reliving their victimization."
Ultimately, though, limiting the victim's anguish is perhaps the only legitimate argument for limiting a criminal's speech. It is unconstitutional to say that a certain group of people may not be paid for a particular act of expression. It also is wrong to make victims relive their victimization, but legality and morality are often two very different animals.
The state is not the guardian of our society's virtue; we are. If a criminal can make a buck off his crimes, the fault lies not with the criminal or the legal system but with a society that is all too willing to pay for accounts of vicious crimes.
Mark Coatney for the editorial board
Bad habits do not always prompt early death
I received some startling information today. It happened while I was reading the cover story of a magazine.
The story itself wasn't depressing. It was about the absorption for physical fitness that it gave.
I don't mind reading about how millions of people jog, wack balls, wrestle with exercise machines, ride 12-speed bikes, and otherwise punish themselves to squeeze into a pair of designer jeans. Just as long as I don't have to take part.
But at the end of the story there was one of those self-testing quizzes that magazines and newspapers like to print.
You've seen them. They're usually labeled something like: "Do You Drink Too Much?" or "How Happy Are You?" or "Are You Under Stress?" or "Are You Courting a Heart Attack?" or "What's Your Rating as Lover?"
You answer the questions, then add up the points, then look at the bottom to find out what kind of shape you’re in. And depending on the kind of quiz it is, it says something like: “Ten to dopoints” You are a terribly inadequate lover and the mate is surely carrying on with somebody else.”
I usually skip these quizzes because I know the results in advance. If you don't know if you drink too much by the red of your eyes, then
Mike Royko Syndicated columnist
you'reprobablytoo shakyto take the quizin the first place.
But the headline on the quiz in the magazine has a title that made it impossible to ignore. It
"How Long Will You Live?"
That is an intriguing question. If you know the answer to it, then you have time to make plans for your future. For example, you might buy a new Mercedes-Benz, knowing your children would be stuck with paying it off. Or you could stop slobbering on your boss' shoes and tell him what you really think of him and his wife.
The personal facts included whether I lived in a city or small town; the longevity of my grandparents, health of my parents, marital status and earnings. The lifestyle questions
So I took the quiz, which consisted of about 30 questions in two categories: personal facts and lifestyle status.
had to do with how much I smoked, drank, exercised, slept, weighed, and whether I was easy-going or an aggressive, angry person.
It was a simple test. I started with 72 points, each of which represented a year. Then each question was worth plus or minus points or years. I just added or subtracted as I went along.
When I finished, I 16 looked at the final number.
Then I looked for further instructions. Most quizzestell you to multiply by two or something like that.
But there were no further instructions. The final number was it.
"That can't be right," I told myself. And I took the quiz again. But the results were the same.
According to that test, I died seven years ago.
I couldn't believe it. I went to a co-worker and just too took it in this magazine. It says
He nodded and said, "I'm not surprised. You haven't looked well lately."
Hoping to show that the test gave inaccurate results, I asked a friend who doesn't drink, smoke, sweat, get mad, and stays in perfect shape. I asked the questions. The final figure was 82 years.
"How did you do?" myvice-free friend asked.
And I know others who have the same habits and have made it to ripe old ages.
After I took the test, I sought out one of the oldsters in the nearby bar and asked him, "Old-timer, how long have you been living this way?"
"AsfarbackasIcanremember,"hecackled
"As far back as I can remember," he cackled, I looked at his wrinkled, withered face, his furred hair, and the liver spots on his bands, and asked, "To what do you attribute your remarkable old age?"
At first I was depressed. I've always known that my lifestyle isn't recommended by most phys-ied instructors, but I didn't think the situation was that serious. After all, I take vitamin pills and get regular exercise walking down escalators.
He said, "What the hell are you talking about? I'm only 38."
The joint does have poor lighting.
Now that the initial shock has worn off, I don't feel as bad about the test results. In a way, I find them complimentary.
For one thing, I took the test again, basing the answers on the condition I was in seven years ago.
Those results showed that I wouldn't have died until last year. So that tells me something,
"I died seven years ago."
"Nonsense. Only the good die young."
Nevertheless, there's a warning in the test results, I guess. So I'm going to immediately change some of my bad habits.
By doing so, I can make a dramatic shift in the results and add about 10 years.
You can look at it this way: I must be a truly amazing physical specimen if I'm in such awful shape that I should have died seven years ago, but I still want around today.
For one thing, I lost three points (or years) by answering "yes" to the question: "Do you work behind a desk?"
I'm going to add those three years by moving out from behind my desk and sitting on my sofa when I write.
Also, I failed to pick up two years by answering "no" to the question: "Did any of your grandparents live to be 85?"
Actually, one grandfather would have surely made it, but he died at 82 in a bar brawl with a sneaky young man who had a knife hidden in his sleeve.
Finally, instead of losing three points by being "intense, aggressive and easily angered," I'll gain three by becoming "easygoing and happy."
And I'll drink to that
KANSANSTAFF
■ Mike Royko is a syndicated columnist for the Chicago Tribune.
TIFFANY HARNESS Editor
VANESSA FUHRMANS Managing editor
TOM EBLEN General manager, newsadviser
Editors
although I'm not sure what.
News     Mike Andrews
Editorial    Beth Randolph
Planning    Lara Gold
Campus    Eric Gorski/Rochele Oleson
Sports     Eric Nelson
Photo     Julie Jacobson
Features   Debbie Meyers
Graphics    Jeff Messer/Aimee Brainard
JENNIFER CLAXTON Business manager
Business Staff
JAY STEINER Retail sales manager
JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser
Business Staff
Campus sales mgr ... Briwen ebengoow
Regional sales mgr ... Rich Hamburger
National sales mgr ... Scott Hanna
Co-op sales mgr ... Ame Johnson
Production mgrs ... Kim Wallace
Marketing director ... Lea Keeler
Marketing director ... Kim Claxton
Landscape designer ... Lauren Crawford
Classified mgr ... Kip Chin
letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include class and homeetown, or faculty or staff position. Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed. The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Snuffer-Flint Hall.
Stick
bv David Rosenfield