Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!hogpd!keduh
From: keduh@hogpd.UUCP (D.HUDEK)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: submitted for comments
Message-ID: <363@hogpd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Jul-84 09:46:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: hogpd.363
Posted: Thu Jul 19 09:46:54 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Jul-84 04:12:14 EDT
Lines: 60

<<||>>

Let's see... how do I get around those nasty ol' copyright
laws... :-)  Oh yeah... I'd like to display some excerpts
from an editorial in the Wall Street Journal for the purposes
of [review, was it? maybe discussion will be good enough]...
To set the mood.... the editorial started off with a discussion
of Gov. Cuomo's speech at the Democratic Nat'l Convention...

=====================================================================
...
It was instructive to listen to the counterpoint in the governor's
keynote address. Do not be deceived because President Reagan has
a genial personality. Do not be deceived because inflation has been
brought under control. Do not be deceived because a vigorous economic
recovery is under way. We kept expecting him to say, do not be 
deceived because you are better off then you were four years ago.

What the cheering Democrats would like to forget is that there have been
lessons to learn since 1936...
One, for example, has been the discovery in economics of the wedge
model, that taking from workers and giving to nonworkers destroys
the incentives of both and thwarts technical innovation and economic
growth. This simple reality puts limits on the compassion of the
welfare state.

Further, it is known: That today's young most likely will pay more to 
support their elders than future generations will pay to support them.
That the federal deficits so much deplored by Gov. Cuomo were built
while Tip O'Neil and his redistributionist House Democrats remained
in control of the nation's purse strings. That deficits didn't
become an issue with Democrats until Ronald Reagan and a rebellious
public began to deny the government further tax increases.

...

Beyond the practical problems, there is a moral one. The tax-and-give-
to-the-poor ethic requires an assertion of *moral authority* 
[asterisks mine :-)], a justification of taking from one to give
to another. Most Americans will accept this so long as the taxes are
within reason and *the programs visibly help the poor* [again, I
put in the stars], but to many of us this no longer seems the case.
And as political resistance develops, liberal Democrats respond
with ever more strident claims of a *higher morality* [ditto].
Hence, the assaults not only on Ronald Reagan's policies but on
his character, the assertion that those who disagree lack any
feelings for others, the nuclear-freeze assertion that those who
have a different view of how to prevent war admire weapons of
mass destruction.
========================================================================


All in all, I found the editorial to be rather interesting. How
about it y'all... do you agree or disagree with the statements
made in the editorial ?? and why ??  Let's try to discuss things
civilly without stooping to name-calling, at least for a while. :-)
net.politics was getting kind of boring, so I thought I'd do
my part to get it moving again. :-)

ihnp4!hogpd!keduh