From: kebarnes@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: A different prediction
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:39:53 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <1992Nov4.225440.8335@pony.Ingres.COM>, garrett@Ingres.COM (It's not what you got, it's what you give) writes:
> 	Now that we have been given prediction, after prediction, of
> doom from conservatives, let me make a prediction with a more reality
> based slant.
> 
> The Economy and the Deficit:
> 
> 	The economy will improve marginally. Unemployment will decline
> by a percent or two. Unlike the growth of the 80's, most new jobs made
> will not be minimum wage jobs (mostly because of Clinton's investment
> tax credits). On the bad side, because of good paying jobs being created
> inflation will rise slightly to 6 or 7%, but it won't get out of hand.

Just a brief explanation of *how* "good paying jobs" cause inflation?
Or, are you predicting that inflation will return (6 or 7 percent is not a
"slight" increase over what we have now), and trying to make it seem that
the reason we have low inflation now is because there allegedly aren't
"good paying jobs"?
The last inflationary spiral we had was related to government expansion of
the money supply, as well as higher oil prices. 

> 	The deficit will be Clinton's biggest problem.
> Clinton will cut the yearly deficit in half over his four years, but
> the credit crunch caused by the Huge federal debt left him will dampen
> his economic program and not allow him to cut the deficit as much as 
> he wants. On the good side, interest rates will not increase as much
> as feared in order to maintain the growth.

Is Clinton going to get the line-item veto out of Congress that he
claims to want in his "Putting People First Plan"? Also, how come
no mention was made of the line-item veto in the Democratic Platform,
despite the fact that every other point of Clinton's plan was included?
Without the ability to cut out the fat in the Omnibus Pork-Barrel
Incumbent Re-Election Act, how will he prevent Congressional overdrafts?
Also, do you personally feel that insufficient taxation is the cause
of deficit spending, or should government growth be restrained instead? 

>  Government employment rate will not decrease (despite what he promises).
> On the other hand, it will not increase either.
> 	Clinton's promise of tax relief for the middle class never 
> comes about, but neither does the conservatives claim of higher taxes 
> for the middle class.

Clinton has the following options for implementing his "investment"
strategy:

1. Move existing spending priorities around, (i.e. further defense cuts).
2. Raise taxes broadly to pay for additional government services, (i.e. "soak
the private sector")
3. Increased borrowing to pay for additional government services, (i.e.
continued deficit spending)
4. Scale back on his plans for additional government services, (i.e.
blame Reagan-Bush)

Options 1 and 4 seem most likely, with a little of 2 and 3 thrown in
for good measure. If Perotistas scream about 3, then option 2 seems
even more likely. He doesn't have a pledge to worry about, and it
doesn't have to be an income-tax increase.  

> 
> Trade:
> 
> 	The NAFTA will fall apart when Canada pulls out of the 
> agreement. Mexico will give up after Clinton asks to renegotiate parts
> of it, and members of Congress create strong opposition.
> 	China will finally be dropped from MFN trade statis.

NAFTA is dead because Clinton will have to side with protectionists.
I agree.

> 
> Crime:
> 
> 	The crime problem will continue to be a big problem 
> because neither Clinton or any other politician in Washington has the
> courage to admit the drug war has failed.
> 

Clinton certainly won't be the one.

> Supreme Court:
> 
> 	It will be the conservatives worst nightmare when 2 moderate
> and 1 conservative judge retire and Clinton replaces them with liberal
> judges. Therefore, balence will be restored to the Supreme Court.
> 

No one cared about "balance" when there were only activist liberals
on the court. Strict constructionism rules!

> Congress:
> 
> 	Clinton signs into law such bills as the Family Leave Bill,
> a higher Minimum Wage Law, stronger Environmental Protection Laws, and
> most importantly, a National Health Care Law. Conservatives are shocked
> when all this actually can be paid for without raising taxes on the 
> middle class. Huge cuts are made in the defense budget, including 
> hundreds of closed military bases in Europe. Taxes are raised on the top
> tax bracket. Much to everyone's surprise, Congress does make significant
> campaign reforms.

Clinton signs virtually every bill that crosses his desk. No surprise
there. Conservatives are shocked when liberals can actually pay for
*anything*, except when they pledge to do it out of the defense budget,
or by punishing anyone who succeeds without their help. Congress adopts
public financing of Congressional campaigns, and celebrates by voting
themselves another pay raise. 

> 
> Foreign Policy:
> 
> 	Clinton does not get us in WWIII. He does, however, invade some
> small third world country just to prove he is macho like almost every 
> president before him.
> 	Clinton signs into law a bill that will automatically cut off
> aid to governments of countries that like to kill their own people.

World War III already happened during the Bush Administration, (August 1st,
1990 -- February 27th, 1991). It involved over 30 nations and mobilized
over a million troops. The U.S. and its allies won, accomplishing their
objective and destroying the 4th largest army in the world. Sorry you
missed it. (Probably too busy chanting "No blood for oil" in Lafayette Park.)

I like the Reagan Doctrine better: Give aid to people who'd like to
kill their own government.

> Election 1996:
> 
> 	Clinton will be re-elected, but not because he is a great 
> president. He will be re-elected because the religious right in the 
> Republican Party will blame Bush's defeat on several moderate policies
> and therefore assume control of the party. The Republican Party will 
> still not talk about issues during the election.
> 

And Clinton will still not have any character.

It's going to be an entertaining four years,
-- 
*.x,*dna***********************************************
*(==) Ken Barnes, LifeSci Bldg.       * B/Q '92!      *
* \'  KEBARNES@memstvx1.memst.edu     * VOTE GOP!     *
*(-)**Memphis,*TN*******75320,711@compuserve.com*******