From: irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine)
Subject: Re: To the Clinton supporters
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:40:12 GMT

In article <BxFInD.18I@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>In article <BxC7ry.89n@beach.csulb.edu> sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:
>>In article <BxAxtv.F2M@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com> dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
>>>In article <Bx9L5F.39I@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>>>>In article <Bx7KE9.wu@nic.umass.edu> csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN) writes:
>
>>>>>How can we even talk about healing a nation, when we divide it by our 
>>>>>words?
>
>>>>When your words are "Your money or your life?" we are irrevocable at odds.
>>>>If it's a choice between "healing" and robbery vs. division and justice,
>>>>I'll chooce the division.  You are trying to use emotion to paper over
>>>>the difference between justice and theft.  That doesn't cut it.
>
>>>I agree, Brian.  Clinton has incredible audacity to speak of "healing"
>>>the nation while he plunders one group of people ("the rich") to 
>>>influence the voting of another ("the poor").
>
>>  Gee, and here I thought this was just some 'turnabout is fair play'
>>considering how segments of the rich have plundered the poor 
>
>In just what ways do you think that the rich have plundered the poor?
>The government is taking VAST amounts of money away from people who
>EARNED it (rich, middle-class, and poor) and delivering it to people who have
>not (either rich, poor, or middle-class).  If you think that allowing
>people to make money and keep it is a kind of "plunder", I think you'll
>have to explain just how it works before anyone is going to buy your
>arguments aside from unthinking envy.

Unfortunately, we all get return on the money we send to government.  Spare
the arguements about inefficient services and other garbage (this stuff CAN
be fixed if there is will to do so), but the road you drove to work in today,
the freedom from mugging, or even the police who take the report, the fact
we have set bands for TV Radio and Cellular phone, all those services are
paid through taxes.  OPur whole tax system is based on a "share the pain"
graduated taxation system.  THey tax the wealthier more simply because 
those poeple will feel it les sthan those that earn less money.  No plunder
involved.  If taxes go up, I would rather have graduated increases so
there is less "pain."  

I do not agree that the rich have "plundered" the poor.  What has happened,
is that the rules have favored the rich to increase their wealth manyfold
and the middle to lower classes only seeing moderate to slightly decreasing
incomes and standards of living.  The money was never taken away, it just never
found its way to those poorer people -- hence the widely acclaimed failure
of "trickle down" economics - none of the green or little of it trickled down.

Hence, the people of the US rejected the system (I view votes for both
Perot and Clinton as votes for change > "No more trickle down" votes).


>
>>and the
>>middle class in terms of outrageous profits in drug and insurance
>>businesses 
>
>WHy should they not profit handsomely in return for making people well?
>Would you suggest that drug and insurance companies be prohibited from
>making big profits?  Who the hell are you to tell me how much I am allowed
>to pay for my medical care anyway?

I personally don't give a wet slap what the profit margins of the drug
companies make, but it is curious how costs of end-user treatment have
SKYROCKETED, the profit margins SOARED and yet the medical care for the
average Joe has DECREASED.  As a people we are less healthy than before
1980, yeat we pay almost 2-3x for this (after inflation!).  

Because this happened, an examination is in order.

You may pay for whatever amount of medical care you can afford.  If you are not
in that "rich" bracket, though, don't count on much no matter how much you
need it...(It is cheaper to spend a week in the Waldorf-Astoria's Penthouse
than 5 days in a Hospital with NO treatment!)

>
>>and leveraged buyouts financed by favorable interest-oriented
>>tax laws - heavily lobbied for - and the savings and loan debacle.
>
>Favorable tax laws can't finance anything.  Favorable tax laws just allow
>people to keep what is already theirs.  Of course, I would like to see
>EVERYONE'S taxes lowered, but you seem to think that it is a crime to 
>trade for profit without having government approval (and having the government
>take a big chunk of the result).  Who the hell do you think you are anyway?
>Emperor?

I think this guy is making a good point.  Many of the wealthier people will
attempt to use their influence to pass favorable legislation that allow
them to reap greater benefits.  This by itself seems fairly neutral, 
BUT many of those laws place burdons upon the average person who does not
make enough money to take advantage of those loopholes or tax credits.
(Unless you make more thanb $54k, don't count on cashing in on any tax
credits!)

The S&L crisis is an example of what can happen.  The people involved showed 
great irresponsibility and corruption which WE are paying for now.  Did
*you* get any of the yachts, summer homes, expensive cars and so on that
were STOLEN from the bank (illegalities and rule bending in the deregulation).

And in the age of the LBO's - Did *you* get any of the cash from Greenmail,
or any cut of the profits?  No, but they used *your* pension fund to pay
for it, and accumulated HUGE corporate debt which makes your job less secure
and deserved raises harder to come by (stagnating the income growth).

>
>>>This bald-faced promotion of class conflict, combined with shrill 
>>>rhetoric about "healing", is the epitome of hypocrisy.
>
>>  If the conflict wasn't there in the first place there wouldn't be 
>>anything to exploit. And occasionally, "healing" requires acknowledging
>>and getting rid of the underlying disease first.
>
>Which is?  It seems to me that the most important disease is that some people
>think that they deserve to get the profits of the labor of others without
>their permission, or to control the property of others without their 
>permission.  The solution is not to meet in the middle, but for such people
>to realize the kind of crime they are advocating.

No, you are ABSOLUTELY and TOTALLY WRONG.  The disease is the callousness
and corruption that the so-called leaders in the finance and industrial
displayed when they played poker with so many peoples' lives.  Using
pension funds, greenmail and huge debt accumulations to finance personal
fortunes and placing people at risk with very little reciprocity and
gain sharing.

I am NOT saying that it should be illegal to make a profit, or to buy and
sell without gov't approval, but that there should be a bit more respect
and sensitivity towards the people whose lives you afftect by doing all
the financial wrangling.  

And BTW, I am NOT speaking from a position of poverty.
-- 
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ ^  ^  ^
| Brent L. Irvine         |  "Love is blind ... and stupid." | {\{|}/} CLAN
| irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu |                      -M.P.       |  {{|}} IRVINE
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+  o/|\o OF DRUM