\documentstyle[11pt]{article}

\addtolength{\textwidth}{1 in}
\addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{-0.5 in}
\addtolength{\evensidemargin}{-0.5 in}
\addtolength{\topmargin}{-1 in}
\addtolength{\textheight}{2 in}

\begin{document}\
\pagestyle{empty}
\hspace*{\fill}{\LARGE{\bf ``A Modest Proposal''}}\hspace*{\fill}
\par
\vspace {.2 in}

\normalsize
 

	I would like to laud Professor Thurow for pointing out the
underlying theme behind the Freshman Housing Committee Proposal.  During
Wednesday's [11/15/89] faculty meeting, he clarified this point with the
following statement: 

\begin{quote}
I'm not interested in arguments about whether or not undergraduates like
the current housing system or not\ldots let's hear some {\em adult}
arguments. 
\end{quote}


	The FHC proposal certainly goes a long way toward moving these
decisions out of the incapable hands of immature freshmen and into the more
experienced hand of the Institute.  After living in carefully selected
Institute housing for a year, undergraduates will undoubtedly be better
equipped to make intelligent adult decisions about where to live.

%%[alternately: ...to make living group decisions more in line with
%%mainstream Institute doctrine]. {\em which of these endings is
%%preferable?} 


	Perhaps the next issue the Institute should consider is that of
academic major selection.  It is unlikely that students incapable of making
adult decisions about their own living accommodations will mature
sufficiently in one year at MIT to make adult decisions about more
important issues such as that of choosing an academic major.  If, instead,
the Institute would randomly assign each student a major at the end of
his or her freshman year, this problem would be alleviated in the same
manner as the housing decision.  Additionally, this solution would offer the
Institute and students a number of advantages:
\begin{itemize}

	\item {\bf Eliminate Over/Undercrowding of Departments} -- The
Institute will be able to determine and control the number of undergraduate
majors in each department; thus making departmental resource allocation
easier. 


	\item {\bf Eliminate Unnecessary Stress} -- Since the selection of
an appropriate major will be made by the Institute, students will no longer
have to be concerned about this potentially stressful decision.


	\item {\bf Promote Departmental Diversity} -- Each department will
be guaranteed a random mix of students.  No longer will Course Six have to
suffer from a nerdly stereotype because the nerds will be evenly
distributed among all departments.

	\item {\bf Better Serve Industrial and Government Sponsors} --
Since the Institute could then tightly control the number of graduates per
year in each discipline, it would be able to more closely match the needs
of its various sponsors.
\end{itemize}
 

	This small change would, of course, be just the beginning.  Once
these changes are implemented, the Institute could continue its effort to
protect the undergraduates from their own inability to make adult choices
in other areas.  For example, the Institute could randomly pre-assign every
student a boy/girl-friend.  This would relieve undergraduates of the stress
of mate selection, allowing them to concentrate more fully on their
studies.  To further promote diversity, the Institute could randomly
pre-assign 10\% of the students to a partner of the same sex.

%%{\em several people suggested omitting this last paragraph.  Votes?}

	Clearly, the implementation of the Freshman Housing Committee
Proposal would usher in a new era at MIT, and things need never be the
same again.

\end{document}
     
