Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!microsof!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!houxm!mhuxa!mhuxi!cbosgd!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!iuvax!isrnix!tim From: tim@isrnix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Reagan"s Press Conference Message-ID: <270@isrnix.UUCP> Date: Fri, 8-Jul-83 10:19:24 EDT Article-I.D.: isrnix.270 Posted: Fri Jul 8 10:19:24 1983 Date-Received: Tue, 12-Jul-83 15:49:23 EDT References: hou5e.625 Lines: 49 The Duke of deNet talks about Reagan's efforts to "stay the course" and thus "inspire business confidence". So long as you make over $50000 a year and don't care about anybody making less I suppose that's reasonable-Reagan has given more tax breaks to the rich than any President in a LOOOOONNNG time. However ultimately that course won't benefit even the rich. Why? Because if income is not redistributed to those who will spend it there will be no market for many consumer goods, business will fall ,and ultimately profits will fall too. There is a great myth perpetrated in the media that Reagan has cut gov't spending. He hasn't- rather he's "staying the course" right into the biggest deficits in this nation's history. Once again in the short term it may be great for the big, capital-intensive corporations that Reagan plans on spending $1.6 trillion, more than we spent in ALL OF WORLD WAR II on war, and preparations for war. However imagine if that were spent developing solar or other alternate energy supplies so we won't get zapped like in 1973 again? We wouldn't have to worry about the Middle East and all their oil and turmoil if we got our energy act together. But no, instead we spend trillions to be able to go over and protect a few billion dollars in oil and other resources. That doesn't make much economic sense to me! The FED has just announced a new rise in interest rates--so much for the economic boom. Meanwhile the latest figures show we still have 10% unemployment. So long as one has a job who cares? Well, if you care about people being able to work rather than be forced to receive gov't handouts to survive you should care! If those people are not working it means 1) the gov't (that's us!) has to pay half their unemployment benefits as long as they last (one thing which has added greatly to the current deficit I might add) 2)if they still don't get a job and their unemployment runs out then the gov't provides food stamps and aid so they don't starve to death. Unemployment costs us money! Besides the psychological impact it has on people's feelings of self-worth and initiative. Some people get in a rut they find it very difficult to get out of because they begin to 'feel they are useless human beings. Thus I think Reagan's economic policies have been an unmitigated disaster. Right now we are cruising on the temporary oil glut. What's being done to prepare for the next energy shortage? Nothing. Instead Americans are buying bigger cars again, and the gov't is doing nothing to encourage energy conservation itself. Instead of energy conservation Reagan axed the railroads which are the most efficient forms of transportation over medium distances. When asked why they chopped AMTRAK, David Stockman said "well, nobody wants to ride the trains anyway". It just so happens that those "nobodies" many routes booked solid for months in advance! I think it is instructive that Reagan replaced the portrait of Thomas Jefferson with one of Calvin Coolidge in the White House. Like Coolidge and Hoover , Reagan's policies will bring us long-run economic disaster. Tim Sevener decvax!pur-ee!iuvax!isrnix!tim