On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 13:44:50 -0800, Jon Roland
<jon.r...@constitution.org> wrote:
>Dear Editor:
>
>The Constitution requires the president to report on the state of the union.
>What we got was a campaign speech that does not satisfy that requirement. For
>ninety minutes Clinton tried to bribe various constituency groups with calls
>for spending legislation, all of which, with the exception of defense and R&D,
>would be unconstitutional if done at the federal level.
>
>More than that, it pandered to the ignorance of most people, whose economic
>illiteracy allows them to believe that the incumbent president or current
>legislative policy has any positive effect on the economy in the short run.
>Our present prosperity is not the result of Clinton's presidency, but in spite
>of it. To the extent the federal government contributed to it, it did so
>mainly through investments in basic R&D that were made three or four decades
>ago. The only things government can do to promote growth take longer than two
>presidential terms to materialize. All it can do in the short run is
>redistribute, which generally impedes growth.
>
>Our constitutional republic will not survive if people don't stop giving
>credit to the rooster crowing for the rising of the sun, or blame him if there
>is a storm.
>
>--Jon Roland
>
>===================================================================
>Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825
>916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM Date: 01/29/00 Time: 13:24:30
>http://www.constitution.org/ mailto:jon.r...@constitution.org
>===================================================================
>
Sing Wee wrote in message <38954b8e...@news.telepath.com>...
Crime is down, the welfare rolls are down, unemployment is down, the
deficit eliminated, teenage pregnancy down, abortion down (this ought to
be popular with conservatives,) three quarters of Americans say they're
better off and you don't like it? The federal bureaucracy is even
smaller than it used to be!
You don't have to give Clinton credit for these things, but the fact
that you think things were better before shows a pretty weird agenda. I
personally enjoy safer streets and am glad people can easily find jobs.
OK so you stocked up on your guns and your emergency rations and now
you don't have to use them: that's a *good* thing dummy. Look why don't
you just play pretend: take your toys and hide in the sewer system and
imagine UN troops are patrolling the streets. You can use up your
ammunition on rats which according to patriot leader Liddy make very
good eating and prove you're a real man!
>be popular with conservatives,) three quarters of Americans say they're
>better off and you don't like it? The federal bureaucracy is even
Only the Military bureaucracy. The rest of the Federal Government is
larger.
>smaller than it used to be!
>
> You don't have to give Clinton credit for these things, but the fact
>that you think things were better before shows a pretty weird agenda. I
>personally enjoy safer streets and am glad people can easily find jobs.
Clinton only managed not to mess it up. Economists were predicting that
the last decade or two of the 20 century would be the great prosperity
that it is.
I know Clintons loyal subjects want to give him all the credit though.
See ya in the GCL!
(Government Cheese Line)
Bubzug
Andrea Chen <fallin...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<3895C6...@earthlink.net>...
> > The state of the union is a mess.
>
> Crime is down, the welfare rolls are down, unemployment is down, the
> deficit eliminated, teenage pregnancy down, abortion down (this ought to
> be popular with conservatives,) three quarters of Americans say they're
> better off and you don't like it? The federal bureaucracy is even
> smaller than it used to be!
>
> You don't have to give Clinton credit for these things, but the fact
> that you think things were better before shows a pretty weird agenda. I
> personally enjoy safer streets and am glad people can easily find jobs.
>
The welfare rolls are down 50%. I guess you're talking about farmers
and their subsidies (about as big as AFDC) but even these are being
called into question.
As for being harder to be a "hard working clean living American" this
is true if you don't have a high skill job. But notice it's
conservatives who oppose increases in minimum wage. As for the rest
houses are bigger and multi car families are a lot more common then when
I grew up. And under Clinton (again I don't give him credit) most of us
who save for retirement have made huge (perhaps temporary) gains. These
have not been hard years and if things continue to go well (knock on
wood) there seems to be a real increase in wages for those who didn't
chose careers with highly valued skills.
Don't knock it. There was a time when unemployment was approaching
10%, inflation was in the double digit figures and regional industries
were collapsing. As for statism it's legitimacy has declined. No
modern president could attempt wage and price controls like Nixon did.
The government is no longer trusted or regarded as a savior as it was
(by many) in the thirties, forties, fifties and sixties.