With a minor in economics, I am by no means claiming to be Ben Bernanke, but a few tidbits of knowledge have managed to sneak into my thick skull throughout my time at Harding. Recently, it occurred to me that the cafeteria’s monetary system seems inherently flawed.
As a graduating senior who has lived in the dorm all four years, I have been required to buy a cafeteria meal plan every year. To the freshmen, I am afraid to tell you that, come end of the semester, you are in for a rude awakening. During the last few weeks of the semester you might ask how many swipes you have left, only to your horror to hear Ms. Norma reply with a number upwards of 100. With swipes running around $8 apiece, that means you could be left with approximately $800 of unused swipes.
The problem arises with lack of accountability for the cafeteria’s food. It actually benefits the cafeteria to make lower quality food. If cafeteria food is poor, less people come to the cafeteria. If less people come to the cafeteria, they can make less food. If they can make less food, they save money. The cafeteria’s economic system encourages them to make worse food. The real catch is that if you do not like this system or the food and live on campus, there is nothing you can do about it, because living in most dorms requires you to buy a meal plan.
Of course, what good is bringing up a problem without an answer? What then is the solution? I believe if our swipes were interchangeable with DCB, it would provide for a better cafeteria system. The cafeteria would then have a competitor in which to help raise food quality.
Imagine if each swipe was worth $8 of DCB. If the cafeteria wanted to make money on this system, students would have to be convinced that the food was up to par or better than that of the student center. In addition, it would provide students with more choices on how to spend their meal plans. In my opinion, more choices make for a better system. I believe the cafeteria dilemma presents an excellent example of what happens when someone has ownership of the entire market, as opposed to a more capitalist system that encourages competition.
Ask yourself which you ran out of first, caf swipes or DCB. If my guess is right, you probably ran out of DCB first. I think this only backs up my theory. Since there would be competition with student center food, the quality would have to be raised. Furthermore, if the cafeteria’s food was better, it would encourage people off campus to buy bigger meal plans, and the cafeteria would earn more money.
Perhaps it’s my picky eating and I’m the one who is wrong. Maybe my proposed solution would only hurt the student center and cafeteria. Regardless, I think a good look at the number of swipes used by students could reveal the truth of whether or not the cafeteria’s food quality is good. In addition, Harding prides itself on receiving donations to knock off a third of tuition. Why not further help us financially by not forcing us to buy meal plans? If Harding is confident that it is providing a quality cafeteria food experience, they should have no problem giving us a free choice of whether or not to buy a meal plan.
