4A - Wednesday, September 16, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 1 I I e NIC4*igan + i1u a Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. Shifting gears Wixom energy park will benefit economy and environment Y ou mayhave never heard ofWixom, Mich., butone day soon, you might be counting on the city to power your house or car. Two companies dealing in alternative energy, Xtreme Power and Clairvoyant Energy, will soon manufacture high effi- ciency solar panels and energy storage systems at the location of the former Wixom Ford Plant. This is excellent news for Michigan as the state struggles to get back on its feet after the decimation of much of its traditional manufacturing base. New energy projects are a great way to kick-start the state economy, and the state legis- lature should continue to push for more of these. In my view, by apologizing to the president, the most important person in the history of the world, that applied to everyone." - Representative Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) ,commenting on why he has not apologized to other government leaders for his "You lie!" outburst during President Barack Obama's speech last week, as reported yesterday by CNN. ROSE JAFFE E-MAIL ROSE AT ROSEJAFF@UMICH.EDU T-eu5. 8AM. ~ K!MS g i5M 1 lie, SAT'5 AM. o 'je5i-ci _.- - y~'I - p O= WG Another sti mulusll No way a In 2007, the Wixom Ford Plant closed after 50years, eliminating about a 1,000 jobs. But last week, Texas-based Xtreme Power and Clairvoyant Energy out of California announced a plan to redevelop the 320- acre site into an energy park housing new manufacturing plants by 2011. The project is expected to cost $725 million but will receive $100 million in tax breaks from the state. The new factories will produce environmen- tally friendly solar panels and storage batter- les and are expected to directly create 4,000 jobs, as well as indirectly support other state industries like the glass industry. On a national level, the park is part of a necessary movement for cleaner energy. The age of dependence on non-renew- able, carbon-emission-producing oil and unhealthy fossil fuels is coming to an end - the rising demand for fuel-efficient vehi- cles is evidence of that. Solar panels and storage batteries are a vital component of renewable energy and efficiency, and that's the direction the country is headed. But renewable energy options are par- ticularly important for Michigan, because they help diversify our staggering economy. Gov. Jennifer Granholm has been advocat- ing this point for years, focusing specifical- ly on increasing the wind and solar energy industries - with good reason. Alternative energy is a growing industry, and with the creation of the Wixom energy park, Michi- gan has the opportunity to be a leader in this field. The state desperately needs to move beyond its traditional base of heavy manufacturing, and being at the forefront of the clean energy movement will spell success for the state economy. The energy park will also directly benefit Wixom residents, creating much-needed jobs in a state with the highest unemploy- ment rate in the country - about 15 percent, according to the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor & Economic Growth. four thousand jobs might seem like nothing, but the industry should grow, and with it, attract more jobs. The costs can hardly be compared to the benefits for the generations to come - the state's $100 million investment should pay large dividends. The energy park should serve as a successful paradigm for future endeavors in solar and renewable power. Now if only the legislature can follow up ,the Wixom plant with an even greater push for clean energy, Michigan can truly join the 21st century as a leader in the field. 4 EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca, Brian Flaherty, Emma Jeszke, Raghu Kainkaryam, Sutha K Kanagasingam, Erika Mayer, Edward McPhee, Harsha Panduranga, Asa Smith, Brittany Smith, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder, Laura Veith The Daily is looking for a diverse group of strong, informed, passionate writers to join the Editorial Board. Editorial Board members are responsible for discussing and writing the editorials that appear on the left side of the opinion page. E-MAIL ROBERT SOAVE AT RSOAVE@UMICH.EDU FOR MORE INFORMATION. SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU henever I hear legislators, TV pundits or my fellow classmates praising Presi- dent Barack Obama for saving the national economy with last Febru- ary's stimulus plan, I am infuriat- ed. It is impossible for the American Recovery and Reinvestment ActV of 2009 to have VINCENT done anything but PATSY made the economy_ worse. The govern- ment can't just rise out of the system and save it - it is akin to trying to fill the deep end of a pool by taking water from the shallow end. In its attempt to stimulate the economy, the govern- ment borrows money, takes resources away from the public and depresses another part of the economy. For this reason, all governmental policy directed at stimulating the economy, namely fiscal and monetary mea- sures, are doomed to failure. The government can only create jobs by destroying other ones. The inability of stimulus plan sup- porters to understand this may stem from misconceptions about the roles of the public and private sectors of the economy. The truth is that the private economy consists of people working cooperatively to produce goods and satisfy consumer demand. The public sector - that is, the government sec- tor - can only maintain itself by seiz- ing resources from the private sector to fund whatever political goals cur- rently exist, whether they unemploy- ment benefits, public works, bailouts, wars or anything else. The govern- ment does this through either taxation or borrowing. Far from stimulating the economy, the government is really just leeching off of it. All this government leeching is actually a double tax. By using my money to buy goods and services, the price of these goods and services goes up. When the government taxes the public, it decreases their amount of resources, thus decreasingthe amount of consumption. If the government builds a bridge, it costs more for pri- vate contractors and business owners to build their own projects because workers and materialshavebeentaken out of the economy. The stimulus plan essentially takes my money and uses it to outbid me in the market. But just as taxation hurts the econ- omy, so too does government borrow- ing from the private sector. Every dollar that the government borrows makes it more difficult for small and large businesses to find credit. The sheer lunacy of this is that while the government spends money on unem- ployment benefits, business owners lack the ability to buy machines or to keep people employed because the government is using all of the sav- ings. All things equal, the increased borrowing by the government leads to either a rise in interest rates and/or a decrease in private consumption. This has the same effect as taxation, except not only do the taxpayers have to pay the original amount but they have to pay the interest, too. Although we have all been indoctri- nated to think that there exists some- where an "economy" and we interact with it when we have a job or buy things, this is not the case at all. Your wages ultimately do notcome from you employer, but rather from what you produce and exchange with other peo- ple. We are all consumers, and those of us who are producers - those of us who have private sector jobs - produce goods to satisfy consumer demand. We receive money wages which represent what we have produced. In our modern economy, dollar bills are essentially claims to goods. One hundred dollars can be exchanged for $100 worth of goods. Since money is in a state of perpetual barter between all goods, once there is enough money, there is no need for any more. This is especially true in our paper money standard of today. Money, like the yard or meter, is just a relative value by which we can measure value and coordinate action. When the Federal Reserve creates new money, the only social effect is to dilute the purchasing power of the existing units. If the Fed doubled the money supply overnight, would we be richer? If the Fed adds three percent per year, which is its current policy goal, will we be richer? All that will happen is that the value of our existing dollars will become hope- lessly diluted. The government can't magically fix the economy. So in response to an economic cri- sis, if the government can only cre- ate jobs by destroying others and the Federal Reserve can only create more money by diluting the current supply, the only possible conclusion to govern- ment policy is a chronic and perpetu- al depression. As supposed experts debate the merits of the first stimulus (actually the second - Bush's failed, as well) and the possibility of enacting a second, I hope that they will remem- ber this. No government stimulus can make you wealthier without making everyone else poorer. - Vincent Patsy can be reached at vapatsy@umich.edu. Military research at 'U' is cutting edge and saves lives with this article, namely that analyzing the past through modern viewpoints is cheap. How about you relate the events to the time frame in which they occurred? No? Not up for historical relevance? All about proving your point? Well 0 MAX BRONSTEINIY TO THE DAILY: done, Daily. Well d I would like to preface this letter by saying that I am an avid reader of the Daily. Thus, I Anna Sheppard have more or less come to terms with the fact Engineeringjunior. that it is essentially socialist propaganda - and I'm only half-joking here. . Daily Write I don't see how the military is the epitome of '"s ~ evil and all that is wrong with the world. Maybe the sanctitj being in ROTC has jaded me, yet I can't see how military technologies that save the lives of both soldiers and civilians are terrible. Why TO THE DAILY: shouldn't the University get involved? Military It hurts me tos technology is on the forefront of engineering. inappropriately in UAVs are cool. Ask any engineer. Monday article (F Ben Caleca's recent column suggests that 9/14/2009) says, " increasing innovation of automated systems with three letters will eventually removethe human element from Another example( war, causing war to be more readily engaged, Poll, 9/8/2009) say (Problems with point-and-click, 9/13/09). This still God in our boo is utterly insane. First, war is and will always God's name shi be a costly venture, in terms of money and irreverently in the human lives, with serious ramifications. No who are mere men one could forget that. Second, without boots on priate word to desc the ground, any gains will quickly be lost. The successful athletes sister services complement one another. No one "No, not even Godc service can win alone. the designer's boas I also don't see how military research is an for the University,: embarrassment to the University, as addressed in the Statement last week (Dark side of cam- Mike Huang pus history, 9/8/09). I have a .lot of problems University alum one. 'rs should respect y of God's name see God's name being used the Daily. A recent Sports- orcier the real Golden Tate, People spell his first name s now ('G,' 'O' and 'D')". (The Michigan Daily Top 10 s of Florida, "Tim Tebow is oks." ould not be tossed around Daily, referring to athletes . Please find a more appro- cribe extremely talented and . Remember the Titanic - could sink the Titanic," was st. We want God's blessing not His curse. A failed method of assessment Last fall, my test scores were noth- ing short of abysmal. These low scores have forced me to reconsider what ben- efit, if any, one gains from the test-tak- ing culture's prevalence in academia. Too often, I find myself cramming for tests and memorizinginformation only to find that after the exam has passed, most of that knowledge is gone from my memory. I'm sure other students can relate. While this rote style of learning is conducive to test taking, it's largely detrimental to substantive learning. Most unfortunately, rote exams tend to assess minor details rather than a broader understanding of philosophi- cal concepts or ideas that lie at the crux of all disciplines. Typically, testing and grades are primarily used for assess- ment. Butthey are also used as a means of motivation. Learning motivated by grades often results in a superficial approach to studying that offers little benefit to the student. Instead, substantive learning should be motivated by genuine interest from both the student and instructor. It is essential that professors demonstrate passionforthesubject.Afterall,profes- sors are in a unique position to inspire passion in students that won't come from test preparation. This is an essen- tial tools to facilitate the sustained and substantive learning process that leads students to one of the ultimate goals of higher education - a commitment to lifelong learning. Exams are an academic convention, and our culture rewards individu- als that excel at taking tests. But this is a skill that is only useful within the academic context. Imagine a boss that evaluated employees' performance with an exam and a letter grade. This would provide little substantive feed- back and offer no tangible guidance for improvement. This raises another question - shouldn't academia assess and reward students using real-world methods? Wouldn't this better prepare students for their professional careers? To answer this we must consider the skills that are most valuable in a profes- sional setting. In my experience, persuasive writ- ingis anindispensible skill inthework- place, which is why many organizations evaluate applicants using writing sam- ples. In addition, the ability to collabo- rate in a productive manner is essential because the most pressing challenges in science or the humanities are often complex - solving them requires the integration of multiple perspectives. Effective problem solving also requires that individuals be able to think cre- atively and offer innovative insight. The test-taking culture doesn't con- tribute to these ends. In fact, test tak- ing, which is almost always a solitary endeavor, is antithetical to the collab- orative culture that is at the core of real-world problem solving. Alternatively, academia could imple- ment more realistic means of assess- ment by encouraging creative thinking and communication from students as well as group projects that emphasize collaboration. This approach would expose students to complex realities and foster critical thinking abilities that ultimately enable real learning. In turn, this will instill students with a lifelong love of learning and prepare for aknowledge-basedeconomy,which will champion innovation above pure knowledge. While academia is often considered to be rational and forward-thinking, it's utterly conservative when it comes to modes of assessment. This conserva- tism places tradition and convenience for the assessors above the potential benefits of new ways of evaluation. It's time to seriously consider and experiment with novel methods to better prepare students for real-world challenges. A new group for graduates and undergraduates called Students for Assessment Reform is starting. SAR's mission is to promote a cross-campus dialogue on new methods of student assessment and provide recommenda- tions to University leaders. If you're interested in joining or learning more, please contact Max Bronstein at mgbstein@umich.edu. Max Bronstein is a Public Policy graduate student. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation Letters are edited for style, length, clarity and accuracy. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedoily@umich.edu.