From: pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:36:08 GMT
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Totally Unorganized

In article <1992Nov5.172237.16957@u.washington.edu> larryd@stein.u.washington.edu (Larry Desoto) writes:
>monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
>
>>In article <1789@rwing.UUCP> pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:
>>>
>>>Well, ya better hang onto yer wallet.  Those making purchases on time
>>>payments, do NOT try to pay it off early - better to pay it off in cheap
>>>dollars, and to hang onto any cash you have, when the inflation starts
>>>spiraling.  
>
>>Do you have any reasoned arguments for this shrill prediction?
>>This is 1992, not 1976, and Bill Clinotn is not Jimmy Carter, and,
>>presumably, energy prices will not triple (as in the 1970's).

Ah yes, anything you disagree with is 'shrill'.  The same people are
for the most part influencing the 'New Order'.  And I damn near starved
to death during the Carter 'Utopia'.

Perhaps you can tell me what is so different (aside from the packaging
of a blow-dried front man instead of one with lots of teeth).
The brain trust is pretty much the same, those holding the major power
in the congresss are pretty much the same, the party philosophy is
pretty much the same.  These areguments are just as reasoned as the
claims of how wonderful the New Order, replete with policies of banning
Cosmetically Incorrect firearms, eventually all firearms (except in
the hands of those they control, of course).  The policies of frightening
terrorist states with nasty speeches at the UN are pretty much the same
("I disagreed with the Gulf War policy, but voted with the majority").

I notice that Iraq is having a holiday, while Kuwait is practically
having a wake.  One can be pretty sure the response when Saddam marches
on Kuwait again will be several years of ineffective 'sanctions', lots
of speeches saying how evil he is, and empty resolutions at the UN.
If you disagree with this, please explain to me why this will be any
different (with a gutted military, all going to social programs, and
increased taxes going to the same place).  Fixing the deficit will
be painful, thus make the person doing it very unpopular, and Clinton
wants to be re-electable.  That virtually guarantees no real action
until his second term.  Again perhaps you can tell me what reason I
have to believe otherwise (aside from Clinton's grandiose claims).

I am waiting....

>Jimmy Carter was ineffectual, but basically a benign and decent man.  Slick
>Willie has demonstrated that he will say or do anything to get (and 
>presumably hold) power.  Maybe those of you that hated Bush so much weren't
>paying attention to what he said he wants to do.  Well, I for one am hoping
>for the best but I also suspect those who voted for change are going to
>get more than they bargained for.  Good luck to us all.  I think we are
>really going to need it.

I am afraid we are in for more of the same.  Trying to eke out a living
under Carter was pure hell.  Prices were going up so fast catalogs
stopped listing prices - they were invalid before they got out of the
printing shop.  A person with a decent job was an endangered species.

Many are young enough that their PARENTS handled these worries during that
period.  Unfortunately I am not that young.  I remember all too well (I
wish I could forget).  Going a week without a decent meal happened more
than once.  And the hunger strike was NOT voluntary - it was called being
desparately broke and out of work.  So please, folks, don't tell me how
wonderful the Carter years were.  I *LIVED* them.

-- 
pat@rwing.uucp                                  (Pat Myrto),  Seattle, WA
                      If all else fails, try:
         ...!uunet!{pilchuck, polari}!rwing!pat
WISDOM:    "Travelling unarmed is like boating without a life jacket"