From: tin@smsc.sony.com (Le Tin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.vietnamese
Subject: Re: BUSH or CLINTON ????
Date: 17 Oct 92 02:14:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: smsc.1992Oct17.021428.7100
Organization: Sony Microsystems Corp, San Jose, CA


  The message from htnguyen@sscvx1.ssc.gov is full of wrong informations.
I wish people would do some research first before spreading false
information around.

In article <1992Oct15.162953.1@sscvx1.ssc.gov> htnguyen@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes:
>Where Bush and Clinton stand on key economic issues:
>
>		BUSH			CLINTON
>
>TRADE For free trade		More likely to
>	Open Market policy	propose retaliatory
>						tariff policies

  This is false.  Clinton has stated that he supports NAFTA, the North
American Free Trade Agreement.

  Here is a position statement from Clinton regarding free trade:

"North American Free Trade Agreement

Bill Clinton will support a free trade treaty with
Mexico, but only if it has adequate protection for
workers, health and the environment on both sides
of the border.  A Clinton/Gore Administration will
support a free trade policy that puts people first.
We just have strong transition strategies that
ensure that workers benefit from a more open world
trading system.


General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

America needs leadership to break the logjam and
get the Uruguay Round finished.  President Bush's
ill-fated trip to Japan and his poor performance at
the G-7 summit demonstrate that our trade policies
suffer from a lack of Presidential leadership.
Bill Clinton and Al Gore will ensure that the
Uruguay Round opens markets for agriculture,
services and in particular manufacturing; protects
our intellectual property; and takes a tough stand
against unfair trade practices.  The United States
need to continue to promote free trade that aims to
raise - not lower - standards for health, safety,
and the environment.  No trade agreement should
preclude the United States from enforcing
non-discriminatory laws and regulations affecting
health, worker safety and the environment.  Bill
Clinton and Al Gore will not allow the Uruguay
round to alter U.S. laws and regulations through
the back door."

>
>TAXES	Even tax structure	Tax the rich at higher
>		Push for capital	rate. No capital gains
>		gains tax cut.		Higher corporate tax

  Bush wants to coddle the rich and Clinton wants to tax them...
and you are complaining?  Unless you are making over $100K a year,
it will not affect you.

  Anyway, what you said above is overly simplistic.  Note that
Bush no longer dares to say "no more tax."  This is because he
know realistically, he will HAVE TO RAISE taxes in order to try
to balance the budget.

  Here is Clinton's position statements:

"   To pay for these investments and reduce our national deficit, I
will save nearly $300 billion by cutting spending, closing
corporate tax loopholes, forcing the very wealthy to pay their
fair share of taxes, and implementing rigorous health
care cost control.  My plan will cut the deficit in half within
four years, and assure that the deficit continues to fall each
year after that."

"   The Republicans in Washington have compiled the worst economic
record in fifty years: the slowest economic growth, slowest job
growth, and slowest income growth since the Great Depression.
During the 1980s the wealthiest one percent of Americans got 70
percent of the gains. By the end of the decade, American CEOs
were paying themselves 100 times more than their workers.
Washington stood by while quick-buck artists brought down the
Savings and Loan industry, leaving the rest of us with a $500
billion bill.

   While the rich cashed in, the forgotten middle class - the
people who work hard and play by the rules - took it on the chin.
They worked harder for lower incomes and paid higher taxes to a
government that failed to produce what we need: good jobs in a
growing economy, world-class education, affordable health
care, and safe streets and neighborhoods. The working poor had the
door of opportunity slammed in their face.

   Ten years ago, Americans earned higher wages than anyone else
in the world. Now we're tenth, and falling. In Europe and Japan
our competitors' economies grew three and four times faster than
ours - because their leaders decided to invest in their people and
our government did not."


>BUDGET	More likely to stay		Higher.  Increased gov't
>		stable or decline as	spending on program.
>		gov't program conso-
>		lidate or reduced.

  Clinton's position statement:

" * Revolutionizing government by cutting 100,000 federal jobs,
eliminating wasteful spending, limiting special interests,
stopping the revolving door from public office to private
lobbying, and reforming campaign finance and practices. "


>GOVT REG &	Less gov't inter-		More gov't regulation
>& INTERVENTION	vention. Slack on	Higher fines & taxes on
>Clean Air Act						corporate.

  Bush has always been favoring the rich and powerful lobbyists
(PAC - otherwise known as Political Action Committee).  He does
not care for the environment nor the future of our children.  Slack
on Clean Air Act from Bush is right.


>ECONOMIC	Capital Gains cut.		More tax.  Less aggressive
>GROWTH		Middle class & 1st		investment tax credit for
>PACKAGE	time home buyers		small to med size business
>			tax cut, higher
>			investment tax credit
>			for businesses.

  Bush threw in the "middle class and 1st time home buyer" pkg
as an afterthought.  His package contains a number of unsavory
things, such as tax cuts for the rich.

  Here are some of Clinton's position statements:

"   * Encouraging private investment in America.  Ten years ago,
the United States spent about $400 more per person than Japan in
capital investment. Today the Japanese invest more than twice as
much in their nation as we do. We must either change directions or
continue to slide.

   To help American business create new jobs and compete in the
global economy, we must dramatically increase private investment.
My plan would:

      - Provide a targetted investment tax credit to encourage
investment in the new plants and productive equipment here at home
that we need to compete in the global economy.

      - Help small businesses and entrepreneurs by offering a 50
percent tax exclusion to those who take risks by making longterm
investments in new businesses.

      - Make permanent the research and development tax credit to
reward companies that invest in groundbreaking technologies.

      - Create a civilian research and development agency to bring
together businesses and universities to develop cutting-edge
products and technologies. This agency will increase our
commercial research and development spending, and focus its effort
in crucial new industries such as biotechnology, robotics, high-
speed computing, and environmental technology."


> ....[deleted].....
>
>***********************************************************************
>* I vote for my pocket book: 4 More Years *****************************
>***********************************************************************

  You won't have a pocket book if Bush get 4 more years.

  Both Bush and Clinton's position statements are available on many
anon FTP sites.  I got mine from ftp.uu.net:/doc/political.  I advise
you and everyone else to get them and _READ_ carefully before making
false claims.

Regards,
Tin Le
-- 
.----------------------------------------------------------------------
. Tin Le                    Work Internet: tin@smsc.Sony.COM
. Sony Microsystems
. Office: (408) 944-4157     Other Internet Addr: tin@szebra.Saigon.COM
Newsgroups: soc.culture.vietnamese