<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Dear Doug,
<p>As far as the unions go, what I'm telling my pals is that Clinton's
plan for Social Security is like NAFTA. Clinton will promise all
of the protections and safeguards, but, after he and the Republocrats get
done we will have nothing. <b> Same deal as NAFTA.</b>
<p>The first time we can say it was his fault, the second time it will
be our own fault.
<p>Your email pal,
<p>Tom L.
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p>Tom
<p>Doug Henwood wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>James Baird wrote:
<p>>Is it just me, or this something new? A Fed chairman coming out
against
<br>>a presidential initiative the day after its proposed? I think
that
<br>>Greenspan has begun to believe his own press.
<p>He's said this before. Republican capital seems not to want any federal
<br>money in the stock market; Democratic capital likes the idea. (Unions
and
<br>philanthropies already have big stock portfolios.) Greenspan is a
<br>Republican. On top of that, it could be that the central banker in
him gets
<br>nervous about injecting big public funds into an already frothy market.
It
<br>looks like all the liberals, from the think tanks to the AFL-CIO, are
all
<br>going to line up behind Clinton's softer privatization.
<p>Doug</blockquote>
</html>