From: esti@quads.uchicago.edu (Paul A. Estin)
Newsgroups: alt.callahans
Subject: Re: Rhetoric: The End of Morality in Society (?)
Date: 5 Apr 92 21:27:04 GMT
Reply-To: esti@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Insanity Etc.

In article <1992Apr4.073253.7277@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jpalmer@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (John D Palmer) writes:

> Don't worry. . . with the budget as screwed up as it is (Interest on
>the national debt is now the highest item on the budget, bigger than
>military and social security spending) in just a few years. . . in my
>lifetime, for sure, the U.S. is going to have to prove whether it is a
>nation of whiners or whether it still has that 'spirit that made this
>country great.'
 
>     I think we can do it. . . but I might have a current passport
>stashed away and I might invest in gold, just in case.

The pessimistic Snark says, "Unfortunately, the US's economy is so
integral to that of the world's, that if it goes down, there probably
won't *be* any place better to flee to."

The pragmatic Snark adds, "What people don't realize is that, even if
we cut *all* defense spending, we'd *still* be running a deficit for
any given year.  One of the few people in Washington who seemed to
know which side was up was Senator Warren Rudman, who understood how
bad the situation was, who realized that in a few years the things
that the government traditionally does (education and research, for
example) will be some 6% of the budget... defense at 15-17%,
entitlements 50-60%, and the rest as interest.  But he's not running
for re-election; to him it became a pointless fight, doomed to
failure.

"The only person among the presidential candidates who halfway
understood the current situation was Paul Tsongas, who got decimated
in the Florida voting for daring to threaten the precious entitlements
of the elderly, who are now, as a generation, the richest Amricans,
while those under 20 are the poorest."

"Moving around money-- and that's what entitlement programs are-- only
makes sense when it's taking money from those who don't need as much
(without destroying their incentive to make more--- wealth is NOT a
zero-sum game) and give it to those that do, and have the whole game
pay off even after all the bureaucracy is taken into account.  Right
now, the government is not even *close*...  it's the lobbyists who
force the decisions."

The optimistic Snark mumbles something about how, hopefully, we'll
wise up and not do anything as egregiously stupid as putting up
protectionist barriers, which would plunge the entire world economy
downwards, the same as protectionism did in the 1930s.  "We have a
chance... there seems to be trend (my main reference is _Generations_,
again) for people to care more about their kids... this trend might
even take the aspect of sacrificing and thinking about the future,
though currently people seem more interested in Bill Clinton's
relationship with the media.

"Forgive me.  I'm feeling cynical about politics today."  Snark climbs
off the pile of soapboxes, kicking several crates to the side in
frustration.

-----
"Yeah, but it gets real lonely as a moderate activist, standing alone with a
sign that reads 'Reasonable informed discussion of the issues, as soon as is
feasible!'." --James Nicoll

Paul Andrew Estin, net.Snark, R.A.C.W.P., UCSFC F.C./K.S., F.C.S.
paul.estin@um.cc.umich.edu  or  esti@midway.uchicago.edu
214 Beakes St. (home)  330 Packard Rd. (work)  Ann Arbor, MI 48104