Clintonomics: The Bottom Line

[John Gelles <jjgelles@xxxxxxxx>]

	         WHAT IS BETTER THAN CLINTONOMICS ?
	     WHAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE PURSUED BY PKT ?

	The other night on Charlie Rose, a guy named Cramer
	(not on Seinfeld) sang the praises of Secretary
	of Treasury Rubin and Fed Chairman Greenspan. Cramer
	is a hedge fund manager on Wall Street and an ex-
	lawyer pundit with a website http://www.thestreet.com
	who is with the bulls looking for lower interest, low
	inflation, continued public purchase of equities
	and no crash in immediate sight.

	He manages 650 million dollars on the street and
	makes a lot of sense in his critique of the
	Treasury and the Fed:  They manage well and have
	given us Clintonomics -- slow and steady growth
	without alarming deficit indicators or an urge
	to cut out all government aid to those in need.

	His critique would contrast the present US prospect
	with other capitalist competitor nations, especially
	those in Europe where Thatcherism and Bismarkism are
	at odds with each other.  He knows Keynesianism is
	there to protect the banks, brokerages and very big
	businesses to avoid double digit unemployment.

	But the bottom line for Clintonomics is more of what
	we've got.  It is to many the best of all possible
	worlds -- and the Dow at 10,000 in the year 2000
	(or before) will prove it.

	So what do we at PKT want from President Clinton?

	A fully planned economy is not our desire. But
	higher growth rates with most of that growth going
	to aleviate poverty and reduce pollution are our
	goals.  The way to distribute growth to meet
	pressing needs -- we say -- is through taxation
	and government spending.  But present rates of
	taxation on working people have made government
	very unpopular with the voters.

	So our bottom line ought to be radically reduced
	payroll taxation -- or at least a demand for this.

	Social security and medicare should not be paid
	from taxes on the voters we want to support
	government responsibility for prosperity.

	The general revenues of government should be the
	source of all entitlements -- at least in liberal
	thought.

	If we would have Keynesian Thought benefit workers
	and not just capital in a crisis we must focus on
	removing taxes (visibly separate from prices and
	personal earnings) from every voter who is not rich.

	Until we do that we won't have the votes to take
	the giant steps that would raise real minimum wages
	and enlarge economic output to prevent inflation --
	in a government subsidized full employment economy.
	
	If we cannot raise the real minimum wage under
	conditions of full employment by tax reductions
	and consequent increased voter support, then
	we will have to add national strategic economic
	policy to our financial thinking.

	We need a bottom line to contrast with
	Clintonomics and Reganomics that promises and
	delivers the quality housing, neighborhoods,
	and environment people can touch and feel.

	John Gelles

      John Gelles  5706 Loma Vista Rd  Ventura, CA 93003
      Voice (805) 642-6675      Email  jjgelles@xxxxxxxx
                   http://myturn.org
                   http://rain.org/~jjgelles/

                     Common Economic Sense

        1. Saving, not unemployment, to fight inflation.
        2. Saving, instead of taxes, to fight inflation.
        3. Inflation protection  for savers and lenders.
        4. Keynesian  financing  of  public  priorities.
        4. High wages/Low taxes and interest/for growth.
        5. Microloans: A legal right to self-employment.
        6. Automation for a high minimum std. of living.
        7. Trade protection  for our defense industries.