ustxtxb_obs_1980_07_04_50_00024-00000_000.pdf

ciniat’s 10111 r About? Parisian Charm. Omelette & Champagne Breakfast. Beautiful Crepes. Afternoon Cocktails. Gallant Waiters. Delicious Quiche. Evening Romance. Continental Steaks. Mysterious Women. Famous Pastries. Cognac & Midnight Rendezvous. In short, it’s about everything a great European style restaurant is all about. ktn a g. Cafe 310 East 6th St. Austin, Texas the legendary RAW DEAL Steaks, Chops, Chicken open lunch and evenings 605 Sabine, Austin No Reservations Postmaster: If undeliverable, send Form 3579 to The Texas Observer, 600 W. 7th, Austin, Texas 78701 Renegade reader I read with interest Matthew Lyon’s account of Barry Commoner’s campaign trip to San Antonio [Obs., May 9]. Certainly the debate between Dr. Commoner and Herb Woodson, Director of the Center for Energy Studies at U.T. Austin, was as spirited as described in this article. As for the Dallas Assembly, which arranged the Common-Woodson face-off, it cannot accurately be described as “mid-thirtyish businessmen and their wives.” Some of the women present in San Antonio are themselves members of the Dallas Assembly, including Kay Bailey Hutchison, once of the Texas Legislature, now with the Republic of Texas Corporation, Eddie Bernice Johnson, another former legislator. now with HEW in Washington, Tricia Smith of First Continental Bank, and even a renegade from Public Television like me. I don’t recall whether or not we were wearing designer clothes. If we were, I’ll bet they needed pressing. A word on Dr. Commoner. His political activities are undermining his credibility as a scientist, and that’s too bad. Lee Clark Vice President Program Development & Production Public Television, KERA 13 Dallas We agree, the Dallas Assembly cannot accurately be described that way; but then, that’s not the way we described it. What we did say was that the group was “mostly mid-30ish businessmen and their wives,” not assuming that all members were male, an accurate description which you confirm. Thanks for your letter, without it, we might never have known who some of those people were in San Antonio. -Eds. Carternomic policy I am writing to thank Alfred Watkins for his critique of the Carter economic policy, “Work More, Eat Less” [Obs., Apr. 25]. It is seldom one has the privilege of seeing the plain truth about inflation, that it is caused by greed and corporate tyranny, in print. I would also like to raise some additional points. First, if the “energy crisis” is real, as I believe it is, and if lifestyles alter slowly, as I fear they do, then a certain measure of “austerity” may indeed be called for. Amory Lovins has amply proved that energy conservation is not necessarily a freezing-in-the-dark affair; nevertheless, I think it is to Carter’s credit that he has prepared the American people for making some sacrifices in that sphere. Second, it would appear that the alternative to “supply side” economics would be “demand side” economics, and I honestly cannot see how inflation is to be halted without a reduction in aggregate demand. This does not necessarily mean austerity, as our economy is primarily geared to creating and filling bogus needs rather than toward filling real ones. I am particularly outraged by cuts in social welfare, but I think we should allow Carter the benefit of the doubt in allowing that his programs may not reflect his intentions. I doubt that Carter’s intention is for poor people to freeze in the dark, although this may well be the result of his policies. It seems more likely that his call for austerity, pain and sacrifice is indicative of a naive faith in bourgeois morality; and it is probably true that if the upper middle class had sufficient moral strength to resist the hype of Madison Avenue that spurs them on to conspicuous consumption a large part of the problem would be solved. Third, regarding multinationals, I think Watkins’ point regarding control of capital relocation is particularly well taken. Few Americans realize the extent to which the multinationals exploit the third world and undermine the domestic economy. I must register some skepticism, however, about the American government’s ability to alter the extent of multinational power. The United Nations is a more fitting agency to regulate this type of business, although there is ample cause for pessimism about their efficacy also. Progress will only be made when the United States recognizes that its sovereignty has been usurped by business, and moves to give the U.N. greater power to control business. Paul Mitchell San Antonio IF YOU ARE an occasional reader and would like to receive The Texas Observer regularlyor if you are a subscriber and would like to have a free sample copy or a one-year gift subscription sent to a friend here’s the order form: SEND THE OBSERVER TO name address city state zip this subscription is for myself gift subscription send card in my name sample copy only you may use my name $18 enclosed for a one-year subscription bill me for $18 MY NAME & ADDRESS THE TEXAS OBSERVER 600 W. 7th, Austin, Texas 78701 Dialogue / 24 JULY 4, 1980