Newsgroups: alt.president.clinton
Subject: Re: Flip-flop?!?
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 25 Jan 93 14:27:17 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

barryb@castle.ed.ac.uk (Barry A T Brown) writes:
> 
> I admit that bad state intervention (i.e South America) can be a 
> death call for industry but well run and thought out state 
> intervention can produce more productive companies which also take 
> responsibility for there action rather than mercilous persuit of 
> the profit instinct.  The scandanavian countries all enjoy high 
> standards of living yet cause far less damage to the enviroment 
> than comparitive American firms.

there have been a number of posts in this group recently from people
in scandanavian countries warning us of the results of their utopian,
government controlled plans. i'll see if i can find one & send it to
you. the point is, they're not all they're cracked up to be.

> I think much of business & consumers are prefectly capable of 
> destroying themselves without government help.  The S&L fiasco (the 
> _real_ issue (if a little dated) in american fiance)  is a perfect 
> example of government leaving the running of a whole sector of 
> industry to the profit instinct.

uh, wrong. the problem is that they -didn't- let the running of the 
whole sector of industry to profit instinct. the government was still 
involved in one important area: insurance. and, unlike private 
insurance, they did not look at the risks and assign costs & 
insurable amounts as appropriate. instead, the offered flat insurance 
to -everyone-. anyone who really works in the private industry can 
tell you that this is a death wish, and that's what it ended up 
being. surprise surprise.

>  freedom to starve,

yes, individuals should have the freedom to starve.

>  opportunity for fraud,

there is -always- opportunity for fraud. in fact, with the levels of 
corruption that have been evident in government i'm surprised you'd 
have the balls to suggest that -more- government will solve it.

>  prosperity for the few, productivity by using low cost labour, 
>  precision without invention and lack of contentment.

seems to me we've had prosperity, productivity & precision with 
invention and contentment with much less government than we have 
today. things haven't always been like this, & we didn't have a lot 
of the problems we have now. hmmm.

>  If America is so happy with it's laissez-faire government why did 
>  it vote for change?  What do you say to the majority of the 
>  American population who's real incomes FELL in the last ten years. 
>  Are they so content?

as one of my friends is fond of saying "The common man is an idiot".
yes, the US has voted for change. unfortunately, no one seems to have
bothered to ask what changes we were trying to get & how they would
be achieved. ok, so a few people have. but they're invariably -not-
the ones voting for the change.

> And thats not even mentioning the benefits of decent state services.

i suspect that's an oxymoron.

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,`   "...my fellow neuronaughts were all linked up, plugged in, speed-   `,`
`,`  crazed, and increasing the bandwith of love." - carlsoje@umn.mr.edu  `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.president.clinton