From: mjp@austin.ibm.com (Michael Phelps)
Subject: Re: Bush's long-term damage
Originator: mjp@bwa.kgn.ibm.com
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 12:00:29 GMT
Reply-To: mjp@vnet.ibm.com (Michael J. Phelps)
Organization: IBM Kingston NY


In article <1atf1vINN8jj@fido.asd.sgi.com>, aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Allan Schaffer) writes:
> mjp@vnet.ibm.com (Michael J. Phelps) said..
> >
> >But its more than just surviving 4 years; its a question of how long it 
> >takes to repair the damage done.. typically presidents try to leave a 
> >"legacy", and it looks like Mr. Clinton's legacy would be ..even more 
> >goverment.. gee, just what i always wanted!
> >
> >Bush is no gem, but i think the damage he causes will be shorter term 
> >and more easily repaired.
> 
> Here's some (only two -- there are hundreds more) long-term effects of 
> Bush's damage:
> 
> [edited for brevity]
> 
> WASHINGTON (UPI) -- 
>          [...] the government, in order to finance
>  its massive debt, must borrow more and more. That drives up long-term
>  interest rates. Increasing borrowing also takes a bigger bite out of the
>  money supply, leaving less for the private sector to use for investment.
>          "The deficit continues to be a real drag on the economy in the long
>  run," said Wyss, who is research director for DRI/McGraw Hill in
>  Lexington, Mass.  [...]
>          In the current year, spending so far has totaled $1.27 trillion,
>  while revenues totaled $972.86 billion.

No argument; the deficit *is* bad; but do you think Mr. Clinton is going to 
somehow fix the deficit?  I know, he has a plan, but do you really believe that
all his proposed spending will somehow be less than whatever he can trim, or
that he can make up the difference by taxing the "rich" some more?  My wife and
I aren't rich, but I believe that his plans will cost us, and paraphrasing your
article:

 "Increasing taxes also takes a bigger bite out of the money supply, leaving
  less for the private sector"

I'd be impressed if he was proposing to cut the existing goverment and not add 
any more.

> WASHINGTON (UPI) -- 
> 	Gov. Bill Clinton's plan to overhaul the nation's
> health care system would save more money and provide health insurance to
> more Americans than President Bush's proposal, a bipartisan report
> concluded Thursday.
>         The nation would spend $2.2 trillion more on health care over the
> next 12 years under Bush's proposal compared to Clinton's, and 27
> million Americans would still have no health insurance, according to the
> report from Families USA, a non-profit health care reform advocacy
> group.  [...]
>         Bush's plan would save $31 billion in spending on health care by the
> year 2000 while the Clinton plan would save $211 billion, the report
> said. By the year 2005, the Bush plan would save $46 billion compared to
> a savings of $481 billion under Clinton's plan, the report said.
> 	[...]
>         While Clinton's plan would provide health insurance to all Americans
> by the year 2005, Bush's plan would leave 27 million Americans without
> insurance, the report said. In addition, Bush's plan would leave 11.8
> million more Americans ``underinsured'' than Clinton's plan by the end
> of the decade, the report said.
> 

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, whats the goverment's track
record at running cost effective efficient businesses (which is what the health
care stuff is IMHO).. hell, they can't even run a post office.

Yes, the current method has problems, but i'd rather they be dealt with by 
reforming the malpractice stuff[1], adjusting the existing goverment sponsored
medical programs[2], and fostering competition to act as a check on high prices[3]
Not very glamorous, but effective.


[1]-For instance, my wife worked for a doctor, who has an excellent rep, and has
    never had any kind of problem.  She pays incredibly high premimums simply 
    because she does delicate, complex procedures.. not because she's a bad
    doctor.  These costs show up in her bills
[2]-Allow preventive medicine coverage
[3]-The doctors know exactly how much they can squeeze out of the insurance 
    companies, and charge it.  

Big goverment (republican or democrat) is *not* our friend.. 
> 
> Allan
> 
> If anyone would like the full text of either one of these, I'd be happy
> to email them to you.
> -- 
> Allan Schaffer                                       Notice 
> aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com       Due to budgetary constraints the light at 
> aschaffe@netcom.com                 the end of the tunnel is being turned off.
> For a free copy of Bill Clinton's economic recovery plan, call (501) 372-1992


michael (whose opinions are strictly his own)
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:1471 alt.politics.clinton:8814 alt.politics.bush:7989