The Sept. 1 issue of The Northern Star presented an interview with Physics Professor Hendrick Hoeve in which the professor used his status as an astronomer to make several unscientific statements about economics. Hoeve began by observing that there were “other areas where the (Voyager) project’s billions of dollars could have been spent.” In the economics department we teach each of our students that the fundamental economic problem is making the best choice among competing uses of resources.

Professor Hoeve does not understand that choices mean tradeoffs. He did not make the case that the “other areas” were in fact better uses of the money. Rather, he made an emotional attack on self-interest as a source of crime and violence. His case is not persuasive.

All of the world’s progress, whether it is high-yield corn, interplanetary probes, or compact discs, stems from someone’s “greed.” “Environmental ravages” are a cost of producing goods and services that people use. We may not have had acid rain 100 years ago, but life expectancy is longer. The “wisdom” we require is that of making the best choices. The professor’s comments encourage young people to confront those choices.

Stephen Karlson

William Sjostrom

Associate professors

Economics