From: nrc@cbnews.cb.att.com (N. Richard Caldwell)
Subject: Re: Perot and Mortgage deduction
Organization: AT&T Network Systems  -  Columbus, Ohio
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:38:22 GMT

From article <BvvHKo.5Mv@apollo.hp.com>, by nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson):
> In article <1992Oct9.202212.18241@cbnews.cb.att.com> nrc@cbnews.cb.att.com (N. Richard Caldwell) writes:
> 
>>
>>Perot's plan is a intended to create long term growth and prosperity.  
> 
>   That's what they all say.  Eliminating the deficit and reducing the 
>   role of government in the economy will in the long run do this.

Perot is the only candidate with a realistic plan to eliminate the 
deficit.

>   The fomer can be done with spending cuts, and the latter is not
>   in Perot's vocabulary.

Perot wants a more cooperative relationship with business.  That may
not be the kind of return of the robber barons that you'd evidently like 
to see but it's a considerable improvement over the adversarial 
relationship we have now.

>>You mean like people who used social security payments to buy racing
>>bikes, stereos and camera equipment? 
> 
>   No, I mean people who advocated these things.  I wasn't even old
>   enough to vote when I got my new stero courtesy of Uncle Sam's
>   Welfare for the Affluent.    As I said, I'm not running a charity;
>   if some stranger gives me $100 legally I'll take it and feel no guilt
>   but that doesn't mean I don't think he's a little nuts.

But ultimately, when we get down to assigning responsibility for the
stranger going broke, you're just as responsible as the rest of the
beggers.  Worse, because you didn't need it.

>>  You mean like every citizen of the United States, each and every
>> one of which benefited from the security of a huge defense budget?
> 
>   This is likewise bogus, since it cannot be shown that I or anyone
>   except defense contractors, army brats, and military personnel
>   benefitted from this.  And that's *some* of who I mean.  

You are rapidly becoming a parody of yourself.   You've completely
pegged the denial meter.  Every character you're posting takes
advantage of a federally subsidized network.  Every dollar you make at
apollo.hp.com contains pennies from the federal till.  Unless you were
educated on Mars you owe your education to federal dollars (even the
most "private" schools get federal dollars in one way or another).  
You use federally subsidized transportation to get to work every day.  
The list goes on and on.

You've already pegged yourself as someone who has lived high off the
federal hog and that's just the one instance that you've allowed to slip
out in the heat of another debate.  The mind boggles to consider what
other federal goodies you've got stashed in your trick or treat bag.

Of course, your standard response is that nobody can prove you
wouldn't have been better off without.  So what?  You can't prove
you'd have been better off without federal spending so the "what if's"
are moot and all we have are the who, what, where and when's.  The
answers to all those questions show a trail of federal money leading
straight to your pocket, just like everyone else.  

>   There are enormous numbers of people either employed directly
>   by the government, or employed as a result of the demands of
>   federal laws or federal contracts, who continue to support
>   the idea of a large activist governement.  THESE are the 
>   people I'm taking about. 

No major candidate has proposed deeper and broader cuts in those 
areas then Perot.  The fact is that there is no way you are going to
cut those programs enough to balance the budget.  Again, you can talk
about these cuts until you're purple.   You will not get any deeper
cuts than Perot's proposals and even those will not balance the budget 
by themselves.

And still again, if you insist on dreaming about these deeper cuts, 
your only hope for establishing a system where they can happen is to
support Perot's program for political reform.   

By fighting Perot you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Clinton is going to win this election.  The only hope for anyone who
wants the kinds of things you're talking about is for Perot to
generate a strong enough turnout to turn Bill Clinton's tax,
borrow and spend "mandate" into a voter call for a *real* deficit
elmination program. 


"Don't drive too slowly."                 Richard Caldwell
                                          AT&T Network Systems
                                          att!cbnews!nrc
                                          nrc@cbnews.att.com