From: crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun)
Subject: Re: Something Wicked THis Way Comes
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 14:34:41 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

In article <1992Jul28.235442.24607@reed.edu> orpheus@reed.edu (P. Hawthorne) writes:
>
>  mgreen@cs.toronto.edu (Marc Green) writes:
>: The Reagan/Bush administrations have spent several trillion dollars on
>: social programs. That's enough compassion and caring for the poor.
>
>  orpheus@reed.edu (P. Hawthorne) writes:
>: The Reagan era and caring do not belong in the same breath.
>
>  crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
>: Spending on social program increased in every year of both Reagan and
>: Bush's presidency.
>
>  I maintain that you don't cure anything by throwing money at the
>symptoms. Compassion and caring for the poor is not a budget outlay, unless
>you consider compassion and a welfare state to be equivalent. Revolving
>door handouts are perhaps more cruel than caring, because of their
>inability to solve the problems that cause poverty in the first place,
>while providing the false impressions that have been given above.

If by this you mean that our current approach to solving (I should say dealing
with. solving may not be possible) social problems is misguided and unhelpful
then I agree wholeheartedly and 100%.  In my opinion we need a sea change in
approach.  We have a command and control approach now.  Consider our approach
to low-income housing.  Local governments actually build and run low-income
housing developments.  This means that the poor who need housing will be told
by the government where they will live, how much they will pay, what they must
do to be eligible, etc.  All the choice is taken from them; the choices are
made by local bureaucrats.  Consider Food stamps, where, if you need them then
you relinquish control to the government which then decides what you can buy
and what you can't.  You can buy Twinkies with food stamps, but you can't buy
soap. 

What we need is an approach that empowers people to improve their own lives
and work their way out of poverty.  Instead of discouraging people from
working we need to encourage and enable.  Instead of making decisions for them
we need to empower them to make their own and to take responsibility for
them.  We need to get away from a model where government provides the service
and move toward a model where government provides the wherewithal and the
people choose the services they need.  

[ additional discussion deleted ]

>  orpheus@reed.edu (P. Hawthorne) writes:
>: Ever hear of hatemongering? The phrase, even? I mean, ever?
>
>  crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
>: Yes. So what's your point?
>
>  The working stiffs of America were told by the Reagan campaign that there
>was no hope in trying to improve the standard of living for all Americans
>at once. Life was hard enough just trying to bring up your own standard of
>living, the Republican party line went, but trying to bring it up for those
>less fortunate than you was like trying to tread water for everyone. So
>forget the less fortunate, just worry about yourself, was the gist. If you
>brought your own standard of living up, perhaps some of your success would
>trickle down to the others later.

Reagan's line was that trying to help those who don't have by taking from
those who do is simply hurting everybody.  Instead of redistributing the pie
we need a bigger pie.  To the extent that he was successful, wealth went up in
the '80s and poverty did decrease.  Unemployment went way down, and 13,000,000
new jobs were created.  Seems to me that this is a more successful
anti-poverty program than anything the welfare state has been able to
accomplish.


===============================================================================
William Crosmun
crosmun@dg-rtp.dg.com

===============================================================================
It can't be won, the way the game is run
but if you choose to stay, you wind up playing anyway.

		"On the Boulevard" -- Jackson Browne

===============================================================================
"As to guaranteeing bank deposits, the minute the government starts to do that
... the  government  runs  into a  probable loss.  We  do not wish to make the 
United  States Government liable  for the  mistakes and  errors of  individual
banks, and put a premium on sound banking in the future."
                                      Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933)
===============================================================================