From: boyd@ansjem.anes.tulane.edu (Victoria L Boyd PhD)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton's Nobel Laureates
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:18:09 CDT
Organization: Consultant
Reply-To: "Boyd, Victoria L" <boyd@tmc.tulane.edu>
Distribution: us
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.5v4


cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
> [deleted stuff]
>      Does anyone know the names of these Nobel Prize winners?
> I would greatly appreciate seeing a list of these names.  Thanks.
> 
>      C. Perttunen
> 

I downloaded this from an ftp site (nptp I believe).  Hope it helps.

---------begin

THREE MORE NOBEL-WINNING ECONOMISTS BACK CLINTON'S ECONOMIC STRATEGY

July 3, 1992


Three more Nobel-prize winning economists today expressed support for Clinton's 
"Putting People First: A National Economic Strategy," as a sound combination of 
significant deficit reduction and economic investment.  These endorsements bring 
to six the number of Nobel Laureates who have expressed support for Clinton's 
economic plan.

"Governor Clinton touches all the bases in his economic statement--problems of 
public debt, deficits, unemployment, education, income distribution, [and the] 
environment.  I do believe that he has laid out some very sensible and admirable 
policies for initiating a vigorous recovery of the economy in a stable non-inflationary 
environment," said Lawrence Klein, Professeur of University of Pennsylvania.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professeur Paul Samuelson said, "Clinton's 
economic program makes prudent sense.  America most needs capital formation -- human 
and material capital, private and public capital. Reagan-Bush structural budget deficits 
reduced the nation's savings available to finance these investment." 

"I am greatly impressed by Governor Clinton's honesty and courage for providing the 
country with his program and its fiscal implications," said Massachusetts Institute of 
Technology Professeur Franco Modigliani.

Last week, Clinton's plan received strong support from Professor Kenneth Arrow of Stanford 
University, Professor James Tobin of Yale University, and MIT Professor Robert M. Solow.

The complete statements by Professors Klein, Modigliani, and Samuelson are attached, as 
are Professors Arrow, Tobin, and Solow.


STATEMENTS FROM NOBEL PRIZE WINNING ECONOMISTS ON BILL CLINTON'S NATIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY

Statement of Lawrence Klein, University of Pennsylvania 1980 Nobel Prize Winner

Governor Clinton touches all of the bases in his economic statement -- problems of public 
debt, deficits, unemployment, education, income distribution, environment and other 
important issues.  Few candidates in recent years have been willing to face up to the 
deterioration of the American income distribution, and I admire his statement for addressing 
the inequalities that trouble our country.  I do believe that he has laid out some very 
sensible and admirable policies for initiating a vigorous recovery of the economy in a 
stable non-inflationary environment.

Statement of Professor Franco Modigliani, MIT 1985 Noble Prize Winner

I am greatly impressed by Governor Clinton's honesty and courage for providing the country 
with his program and its fiscal implications.  And there is a good deal in his program that 
offers definitive improvement over the past years of serious mismanagement of the economy.  
In particular, I support his emphasis on four issues that must urgently be taken care of to 
re-establish the health and leadership of our economy: namely, more investment, public and 
private, better education and training, more effective management of welfare and health, and 
reducing the budget deficit -- even if at the expense of somewhat higher taxes for the 
wealthiest.  His deficit projections may be somewhat optimistic and some further tightening 
may be required in the end, but his stance is in the right direction.  I hope the nation will 
understand this program and stand by its worthwhile proposals.

Statement of Paul Samuelson, MIT 1970 Nobel Prize Winner

Clinton's economic program makes prudent sense.  America most needs capital formation -- human
and material capital, private and public capital.  Reagan-Bush structural budget deficits 
reduce the nation's savings available to finance these investments.  It is both fair and 
effective to generate some of the needed tax revenues from those of us at the top who have 
made out extraordinarily well under Reagan-Bush tax concessions.

---------end

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Victoria L Boyd PhD

boyd@vax.anes.tulane.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5392 alt.politics.bush:5103