HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:47:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.185913.20446@eskimo.celestial.com> kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum) writes:
|
|The rural areas of Colorado and Oregon appear to have been overrun by
|a Stupid population explosion similar to what Australia experienced
|with rabbits last century.  I'm serious.  I think it's related to the
|"dumbing down" phenomenon that has been noted in recent years.
| <much ranting equating rural conservatism with Stupidity...deleted>

Well, you may want to win the hearts and minds of the rural community, but
you'll never succeed by viewing them with such contempt.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

Why do they call them apartments when they're all stuck together
--Gallagher
________________________________________________________________________________
From: monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan )
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:17:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov5.211738.5598
Organization: UW Computing

In article <MS-C.720992265.662824084.mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM> Mark Crispin <mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM> writes:
>
>No; the inflation was already there.  Carter wanted to stop it, as did Ford
>(remember WIN buttons?), but Carter lacked the strength of will to do what was
>necessary to bring inflation under control.
>

Yes, yes, and Nixon's wage/price controls were great fun :)


>>And again I ask, why such dire warnings?
>
>The reason is that there is a great pent-up demand within the political base
>that forms the root of the Democratic Party platform for a number of
>government programs which had been stalled for the past 12 years.  Many of
>these programs are inflationary in nature.  I can not see Clinton cutting back

If the exhorbitant spending of the past 12 years didn't increase inflation,
I don't see where this can be a great threat.

If fact, Bush's submitted budgets contained more spending than what was
actually appropriated by Congress (according to the Congressional Budget
Office).

It was the Congress that constrained the free-spending Bush. :)


>on entitlements.  Clinton's hoping to take money from defense spending as well
>as `taxes on the rich' to increase entitlements -- not realizing that any
>monies from such steps should be used to get rid of the national debt.

We need to reduce the growth rate of the federal debt.

The debt is only a problem when it grows faster than the GDP, eg during
the Bush administration.

The 'taxes on the rich' will go toward national infrastructure, which will
help the economy beyond the initial boost in construction jobs.

>
>We really need to abolish the entire welfare state, but Clinton won't do it.
>It'd be political suicide for him if he did.  Even Reagan lacked the courage
>to attack the welfare state except in rhetoric -- entitlement spending
>increased under Reagan.
>

Typical conservative attitude: "I've got mine, now you get yours"

Clinton plans to, if not abolish, at least overhaul the 'welfare state'.
Are you completely unaware of his proposals except as interpretted by
his opponents during the campaign?
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: jallred@spdg.com (John Allred)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Organization: Stratos Product Development Group (Seattle)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:42:58 GMT

In article <MS-C.721459153.1103527590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) writes:
>However, there can be no doubt that the robber barons such as Charles Keating
>belong in the slammer, preferably at hard labor, and their assets confiscated
>to repay those they ripped off (including the US government funds for the bail
>out).
>
>Keating is a prime example of a slimeball.  Republicrats and Demopublicans
>both fell over each other to kiss Keating's ass.  Cranston & co belong in the
>slammer with him.

I believe that the regulations concerning Federal account insurance
were the primary culprit for the mess we're now in.  I wish I had the
same deal ("Go make money.  Oh, by the way, we'll cover your losses".)
Given that, I'd be investing in the most risky thing I could find.

I'd extend the jail list to Jimmy Carter and every Congresscritter who
voted for the current scheme of Federal Deposit Insurance (Kennedy,
Metzenbaum, Helms, Dole, et al.)  

John (jallred@spdg.com)
If God had meant us to vote, He would have given us candidates.
-- 
Xref: sparky pnw.general:2750 seattle.general:3668
From: donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro)
Newsgroups: pnw.general,seattle.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:15:37 GMT
Organization: Tandemonium, Kent, WA

In article <1992Nov11.002324.4698@u.washington.edu> monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
>The following is an analogy.  Please do not flame me.

I take liberty to modify her excellent analogy.

People should be like me.

Being not like me is not right.  People who are not like me increase their
chances for all the things that will not happen to me.

People who *choose* to be not like me live an unnatural life-style.
As a society, we should not accept this as being normal.

Abnormal people should not be in a position to promote their life style
because it makes me insecure with regard to my normalness and I am
forced to irrational behavior to defend what I percieve as my power
in this society.


         Donn Pedro ....................a.k.a. donn@brat.wa.com
	
	       "You talk the talk.  Do you walk the walk?"

		    There are no ordinary moments.
From: dxxb@hardy.u.washington.edu (David Barts)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:47:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov9.174738.26395
Organization: University of Washington

rick@eaglet.rain.com (Rick Lindsley) writes:

>Clearly, dickwin@sequent.com and I do disagree on one very basic
>premise which would indicate to me we cannot probably arrive at a
>compromise that leaves us both feeling comfortable. He believes that
>homosexuals choose their lifestyle; I do not. That right there will
>lead you off on many distinct, legitimate tangents on a variety of
>subjects. If you accept that it is voluntary, then I can see where many
>other arguments become weaker or less important to you. I would
>respectfully suggest in the absence of scientific evidence one way or
>the other, that we err on the side of caution and compassion.

I agree -- virtually all scientific evidence supports the claim
that people have very little choice over their sexual orientation.
However, EVEN IF sexual orientation was a completely voluntary
choice, there STILL would be no excuse for something like Measure
9.

If anyone doubts this, consider for a moment that religion IS a
matter of personal choice.  What would you think of a proposed law
declaring that Christianity is unnatural, immoral, peverse and
wrong, and requiring the schools to teach it as such?

-- 
David Barts  N5JRN                      UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
davidb@ce.washington.edu                Seattle, WA  98195
            Driving is a privilege, not a right.
      Having breathable air is a right, not a privilege.
Xref: sparky pnw.general:2648 soc.culture.usa:8228
From: dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman)
Newsgroups: pnw.general,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Music censorship struck down
Date: 4 Nov 92 15:20:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: kopachuk.1992Nov4.152048.1093
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Tacoma Screw Products, Inc.

In article <1992Nov2.210550.5033@fnx.uucp> del@fnx.uucp (Dag Erik Lindberg) writes:
Deletions...

>The 'music censorship' law has been found unconstitutional and struck
>down. 

Deletions...

Well, this will never stand now that we have Tipper!

-- 
David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
 ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      | "Zinc & cadmium plating stops |  /   ____/ / 
CompuServe: 75760,1232    |  rust & acts as a lubricant!" |
From: il@bambam.u.washington.edu (Il Hwan Oh)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 10 Nov 92 19:36:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov10.193615.8521
Reply-To: iho@cac.washington.edu
Distribution: pnw
Organization: University of Washington, Tacoma

dxxb@hardy.u.washington.edu (David Barts) writes:
> monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:

> >(and speaking of banks, any guesses how many will be closed after Dec 19?)
> 
> I dunno.  It might not happen right after Dec 19, but whenever it
> starts happening, its not gonna be pretty.

What?  Bush called it a "streamlining" of the American banking system in
his "Agenda for American Renewal".  You mean it's not a good thing? :)

-- 
Il Hwan Oh                              | "You live and learn.
Computer Facilities Manager             |   At any rate, you live."
University of Washington, Tacoma        |            -- Douglas Adams
iho@cac.washington.edu                  | 
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:16:21 GMT

In article <MS-C.720991364.377401575.mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM> mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM (Mark Crispin) writes:
|Clinton's capability is still unknown.  But he *is* sneaky.  There
|hasn't been anyone like him since Richard Nixon.  All of our
|presidents since Nixon have been more or less good-natured amiable
|characters.  I remember Nixon, and the two sneaks (JFK and LBJ) before
|him.  I guess after 16 years the country is ready for sneaks again.

Better Clinton than the master sneak of them all: Perot.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

The American people would not want to know of any misquotes that Dan Quayle
may or may not make.
--Dan Quayle, speech to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 1991
________________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:26:59 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.163726.20385@Celestial.COM> bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
|In <1992Nov10.002542.23406@u.washington.edu> dxxb@hardy.u.washington.edu (David Barts) writes:
|
|:Oh *goody*.  Concentrate more power in the hands of a single individual.
|:Just what we need:  a more authoritarian government.  Fortunately, I
|:don't place much chance in this happening.
|
|I have to disagree in this case.  The line-item veto is necessary
|because it's quite common to have amendments tacked onto
|legislation that have absolutely nothing to do with the main
|purpose of the bill.  Tack your favorite piece of pork onto an
|otherwise useful piece of legislation (assuming that such a thing
|exists :-), and it may well get enacted as law.

This was an argument used by Bush, and no doubt it could be used very
effectively to eliminate pork.  But it could also be used just as effectively
to punish a particular legislator for voting wrong on measures of interest to
the President, and as such, places too great an imbalance in the separation of
powers that keeps our government working.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I wrote a song but I can't read music so I don't know what it is.
--Steve Wright
________________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan )
Subject: Re: The Election
Organization: UW Computing
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 17:06:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.055323.325@fylz.wa.com> fyl@fylz.wa.com (Phil Hughes) writes:
>Robert Reed (robert@slipknot.rain.com) wrote:
>
>: Well, at least NPR reported that exit poll data indicated Perot hurt Clinton
>: more than Bush.  If Perot had not been an available choice, their data
>: indicated Clinton would have gotten %48 (up %5) and Bush %41 (up %3).
>
>I don't think this is true.  It may be true in vote count on election
>day but the fact that Perot raised the real questions such as the
>economy stinks hurt Bush a lot.  I feel that Perot did what the
>journalists should have been doing.  Without him we would have had a
>campaign of "did Clinton inhale" and "Did Bush fornicate with
>whoever".
>-- 

Clinton made the economy THE issue (from a board in the Clinton national
campaign office: "It's the economy, stupid")

One of the network talking-heads also showed more Perot supporters would
have voted for Clinton had Perot not been on the ballot (they could have
been using the same information.  Many news organizations shared exit
polling data this year)
From: bradley@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Bradley)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:58:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: mdd.1992Nov11.155810.10220
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA

In article <1992Nov11.030813.3274@klic.rain.com> keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
>
[text deleted]
>
>Now just WHAT in the hell brought THAT on?  We asked "Why yes on 9", and I
>for one am going to NEED to know the reasons people will vote FOR such a
>measure so that I can talk to them and hopefully change their minds.  There
>aren't going to be many people with as much courage as Dick who will speak
>up and let us know what they are thinking - there will be less if the
>flamemongers short circuit the process with vituperation.  
>

I live in Wa - obvioulsy didnt get a chance to vote. I did spend the
weekend in Colo. In the analysis of by one of the papers as to why
Ammendment 2 passed it was stated that while the major cities generally
voted against the ammendment - the rural areas and small city folk were
for it. Some of the reasons that were suggested:

 the people didnt want ACTUP at their school board meetings
   or passing out condoms at schools
 did not want "vulgar" gay pride parades
 did not want to loose their parks to gays only pairs
 did not want to see more AIDS in the area
 did not want anybody teching their children about "alternate"
  lifestyles
 did not want to be forced to hire gays

Surprising no one really cared who with slept with who. I suspect
Oregon reasoning was similar.  I guess the conclusion that 
a little PR by the gay community and some restraint
would go a long way to defusing this issue.
From: monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan )
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:12:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov13.171203.26936
Organization: UW Computing

On the news this morning, it was reported that OCA will target Washington
next for their anti-gay (pro-bigot?) initiative.
From: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: re: US Treasury Reports (Was Re: The Election)
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:08:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: Tomobiki.MS-C.721091315.1103527590.mrc
Organization: University of Washington
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: John Witters <witters@tc.fluke.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0

John Witters -

Your mutual fund is in the US, since it is filing a 1099.  So, you should be
OK (ask a tax lawyer to be sure).  The $10,000 limit beyond which you report
assets is for things like foreign bank accounts.  Foreign banks don't file
1099's.  If the total of your holdings is below $10,000, you're on the honor
system to report your earnings (the IRS is *always* happy to accept you
reporting more interest than they have records for!!!!!!).  But above $10,000,
they want to know where it is, the account number, etc.
From: monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan )
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:06:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov10.010635.26729
Distribution: pnw
Organization: UW Computing

In article <1992Nov10.002542.23406@u.washington.edu> dxxb@hardy.u.washington.edu (David Barts) writes:
>monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
>
>>Perhaps with a line-item veto (which Clinton wants), some form of
>
>Oh *goody*.  Concentrate more power in the hands of a single individual.
>Just what we need:  a more authoritarian government.  Fortunately, I
>don't place much chance in this happening.

Perhaps we have different meaning for the phrase "concentration of power"
but even the line-item veto can be overridden by 2/3 of both houses or,
as Rep. Foley wants, when only a portion of a bill is vetoed, that
(line item) veto could be overridden by a simple majority (of both houses, I
believe).

This could curtail 'pork-barrel' legislation.

>
>Why not move away from single member districting and amend the
>Constitution to have Congress elected on a mixed-member proportional
>basis?  This way, we'll have a bunch of representatives elected to
>represent the nation as a whole, not just a tiny part of the nation.
>Such members will therefore have little incentive to plunder the
>public coffers for something that benefits only a few people in
>their district.

They would still propose 'pork' for their home states ('pork' being defined
as any govt spending in someone else's states :)

Also, amending the Constitution would proprably take 7-10 years, at which
time it would be too late (the last amendment took over 200 years :)

>
>
>>capital-gains tax rate reduction (which Clinton wants) and an overhaul of
>
>Are you referring to investment tax credits (a step in the right
>direction IMO) or has Clinton started pandering to the ideological
>Right in this area as well?

I believe both are under consideration.

>
>>the welfare systems (which clinton wants), some "pork" can be cut, some
>
>Too bad that this "overhaul" seems based more on urban legends of
>the welfare system than the actual reality about it.

Which 'urban legends' are these?  As I understand the proposal, welfare
recipients would be limited to two years on the dole, with emphasis during
those two years to job training.  

>
>>spending reduced, and some investments targeted to creating jobs and not
>>creating (paper) wealth.  Perhaps.
>
From: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 11 Nov 92 05:19:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: Tomobiki.MS-C.721459153.1103527590.mrc
Organization: University of Washington
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mime-Version: 1.0

I don't think the government should be in the banking business.  It's bad
enough that they are in the money-printing business.

However, there can be no doubt that the robber barons such as Charles Keating
belong in the slammer, preferably at hard labor, and their assets confiscated
to repay those they ripped off (including the US government funds for the bail
out).

Keating is a prime example of a slimeball.  Republicrats and Demopublicans
both fell over each other to kiss Keating's ass.  Cranston & co belong in the
slammer with him.
From: andrew@frip.WV.TEK.COM (Andrew Klossner)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 7 Nov 92 18:02:59 GMT
Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon

[]

	"And millions did starve to death during the 'boom' decade of
	the eighties ... I'm more concerned about the war in the formet
	Yugoslavia and the starvation in Somalia."

As am I, and any other person who keeps up with the heart-breaking
reports.  But, what do you suggest we do about it?  The only tool we
have to address either problem is the military.  We would have to
invade Yugoslavia to quell the fighting.  In Somalia, the problem isn't
availability of food, it's distribution of food.  We could fix the
problem if we suppressed the guerrillas who attack food convoys, and
took over the cities to keep corrupt opportunists from diverting the
food.

Are you suggesting military action?  Or do you have another solution in
mind?

	"Deficit is not the main problem.  Fixing a sluggish economy
	... is (IMHO) the main concern."

How would you do the latter without addressing the former?  If we
accept the philosophy of spending our way to recovery, we find our
hands tied by the deficit.  If we increase government borrowing,
interest rates go up and the economy tanks.  If we print more money,
inflation fires up and the fixed-income folks are out on the streets.
That leaves increased taxation ... but haven't yet figured out how to
tax our way out of a recession.

	"Ask the thousands (possible millions) who lost most or all of
	their savings in the S&L crisis what fun the eighties were."

Everybody with $100,000 or less in the bank got a full refund from the
government.  Do you suggest that thousands of people had most of their
savings in the stock of failed banks?

  -=- Andrew Klossner  (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com)
                       (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: jallred@spdg.com (John Allred)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Organization: Stratos Product Development Group (Seattle)
Distribution: pnw
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:10:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.163842.14833@u.washington.edu> 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).

I fear politicians.  :-).  In particular, given the recent focus on
the national debt, and Clinton's avowed policy of "investment", he may
decide that is politically expedient to print money to cover the
increased spending, rather than issue more debt.  Viola, instant
inflation, and instant interest rate increase.

It may be time for me to convert my adjustable rate mortgage
(currently at 6%) to a fixed rate.
--