I had the pleasure of listening to Laura Tyson on NPR this afternoon. She was speaking at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. She said something very revealing: (I can't quote exactly) The reason I have concerns as an economist about replacing a federal entitlement to welfare, food stamps and medicaid with block grants to states is because even in a well managed smoothly growing economy there are going to be dips and bumps. When states experience dips there will be MORE people needing welfare, food stamps and medicaid -- with the federal entitlement, the federal government pays the money to the states as needed. A block grant means there's NO MORE MONEY to meet these blips of rising needs. Note, she never once said recession. The reason, her whole premise in supporting Clinton's balanced budget plan is that the economy will grow at 2.2% for the next two years and then 2.3% for the following 5 years. According to the Tuesday, Feb. 6 Wall St. Journal [p. A2] the OMB and CBO both agree on these seven years of forecasts. I wish someone would ask Laura Tyson, Joe Stiglitz, or any other economist who works for either of these organizations how they can in good conscience make such a prediction when they KNOW there will be some sort of recession sometime before the next seven years. And where are the journalists? Won't someone say the emperor has no clothes? [!!} In fact, does anyone know Laura Tyson's address in Washington?? -- Mike Meeropol Economics Department Cultures Past and Present Program Western New England College Springfield, Massachusetts "Don't blame us, we voted for George McGovern!" Unrepentent Leftist!! [EMAIL PROTECTED] [if at bitnet node: in%"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" but that's fading fast!]
