Economy and Clinton’s Polls

* Re “Economy Keeps Improving, Why Aren’t Clinton’s Polls?” by Walter Russell Mead, Opinion, Sept. 4:

I believe we are near the end of a long period during which people looked to government to solve their problems. In the process, government has come to consume over 40% of the economy. It employs 33% of the work force, which produces very little; mostly it redistributes our tax money. These people live off the money the government takes and returns--after keeping most of it to pay for employees and the redistribution system.

Non-government workers find themselves strapped because they not only support their own families, but also carry the unproductive government sector. Each productive private sector worker is paying for almost two families.

There are numerous signs that productive workers are disgusted. They will look more and more to themselves for solutions in the coming years. The first part of this period will likely have a strong tone of morality, individual responsibility and high productivity. But first, some crisis will arise that will galvanize the productive sector into taking control of government and their lives.

EUGENE KURCHAK

Los Angeles

* Economy keeps improving, why aren’t Clinton’s polls? It’s the arrogance, stupid!

JOHN SCOTT

Los Angeles

* “Clinton Gets Little Credit for Economic Turnaround” (Sept. 5) reminds me of the Rodney Dangerfield line, “I can’t get no respect.” The reasons presented are varied and even hackneyed. Labor Secretary Robert Reich says it’s the fault of the media. Ho-hum. Others (such as Mead) suggest it’s the economy, stupid. Most folks have to work harder just to keep up. Laura D’Andrea Tyson, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, says much the same thing: Blame the media.

They all may be right to one degree or another. May I suggest that a major component of respect is trust and confidence in a person’s word. Lose that and wham!--get shunned by congressional candidates of your own party.

Remember George Bush’s “read my lips--no new taxes” pledge? Bill Clinton could do a lot for his credibility, the economy and the slide in incomes with a “no baloney, no smoke and mirrors” middle-class tax cut as promised. With about 40% of middle-class incomes going to every level of government, it’s about time the pundits, journalists, economists and labor secretaries wake up and smell a tax cut long overdue and end transfers of income to those who never deserved it.

THOMAS J. DOMINY

Pasadena

* The President gets no credit because he deserves no credit. He has not done anything specific to help the economy. The jobs created are low-paying without benefits or a future. The jobs lost have not been replaced in quantity or quality. He failed to do what he could to help, such as create new programs to repair and expand the infrastructure and the like.

One problem is he talks of percentages and statistics, not people. He should talk about the people who have lost jobs and what will be done to make jobs for those educated and skilled workers.

RICHARD J. STALL JR.

Los Angeles

* Re “President Who? Democrats Shun Campaign Help,” which you considered front-page material (Sept. 5).

It is a President who has to deal with a Congress whose members are Democrats or Republicans first and Americans second, and so many of whom are primarily interested in being reelected. A President who has to deal with an American public that fails as citizens of a democracy to fulfill their responsibility with a shocking low voter turnout.

A President who, together with his wife Hillary, has had the courage to tackle the controversial topics of universal health care and reducing now-excessive crime.

A President whose Administration had many important accomplishments such as deficit reduction legislation, the crime bill, the peace agreement between Israel and Jordan and Israel and Yasser Arafat’s Palestinians, the agreement with North Korea that defuses the threat of nuclear proliferation, the creation of over 4 million additional American jobs and the passage of the NAFTA agreement, so important to the economies of the world.

A President who is concerned about the very complex and troublesome situations in Somalia, Rwanda, Haiti, Cuba and former Yugoslavia and whether American interests warrant putting the lives of U.S. soldiers at risk, since most past international interventions have failed to produce either democracy or economic development.

Let Democrats and Republicans be Americans first and support our President, whose main interest is the welfare of all Americans.

PETER H. BACH

Los Angeles