Fullmer lacked clear argument

Alan Fullmer’s article titled “”The wrong kind of ‘green’ thinking”” exemplifies the same vague, glossed-over opinion of money that many people express.

The mantra of “”Money is evil”” in a capitalistic society is out of place to say the least. I find fault with Fullmer’s article on several levels. Foremost, Fullmer doesn’t really make a point with his column. Is his point that money is evil, or is his point that armored guard deaths are too frequent? If it is the latter, then, yes, I agree they are too frequent. However, I also understand that armored guards are carefully selected, trained and equipped to minimize the potential threat posed to themselves and others. Furthermore, these individuals choose to hold this job for many reasons, including the paycheck associated with any dangerous job. Just like any park ranger, police officer or personal body guard, anything that has to do with protecting anyone or anything will be dangerous, and hopefully we can improve training and equipment to further minimize the likelihood of serious injury or death.

If Fullmer’s column is supposed to focus on money as a negative obsession in our society, then his column paints far too much of a straw-man argument of the value of money. Money is more than a “”backbone of our lifestyle.”” If you want to talk hard dollars, each dollar is an amount of value that we place on an opportunity we are presented with. Money is not evil. Money is opportunity. It allows us to understand the costs associated with those opportunities. For example, tuition is the value of the opportunity to go to school. Having enough money to pay rent means the opportunity to sleep with a roof over your head. It provides for the exchange of objects and services of value in our society and throughout the world.

Fullmer spoke of lawsuits that entail settlements of huge sums of money that are for “”immeasurable issues.”” Money, hard currency, places a measurement on these issues in the form of providing opportunities to the recipients. Not to mention that if a corporation is sued, the only way to inflict a penalty that has punitive impact is through fining them for sums of money that can take opportunities away.

People don’t obsess about money. People obsess about what money means to them. Whether it is approval, power, status or comfort, people want to have the most advantageous amount of opportunity that they can. It’s not the number in the bank account; it’s what the number embodies. It is that opportunity that draws people of lower moral positioning to steal or cheat or even kill. It’s the dark side that accompanies the fact that money means different things to different people. Not all people are going to envision opportunities that are positive. Fullmer’s brother rides that truck to ensure that the opportunities people have worked hard to receive do not fall into another person’s hands. That is why his job is important. That’s why we pay people to guard money. To condemn money is ridiculous and often reflects a lack of true understanding as to the ability of currency to keep the flow of society as a whole. Fullmer should make one big change before tackling an issue as large as this one again: have a feasible, clear argument before writing at all.

Jessica Rose
retail and consumer science senior