To The Editors of The Crimson:

Who were those effete baby students at the Buckley-Galbraith debate (just saw it) on Reaganomics who cheered in support of Reagan's policies? According to the St. Louis Fed, the effects of fiscal policy sum to zip in five quarters. The expansion of the middle 60s was caused by monetary policy, not the tax cut of '64, as any good money and banking text should explain. Supply-siders are incompetent Republican Keynesians who can't even think clearly enough to do bookkeeping. The monetarist analysis is correct--ask any physicist or math major.

The professional supply-side economists are not against social and anti-poverty programs: Reagan isn't even a good supply-sider. He is trying to implement opinions that were proved wrong at least 50 years ago, to cut welfare, food stamps. CETA jobs and training, and force poor people to earn honest livings in drug-dealing, prostitution, car theft and mugging. Some may find good careers as Mafia executives. In applying for jobs, poor people should be persuasive--would a Saturday Night Special be sufficient? No, I don't like Reagan's policies. Reaganomics is very socially destructive--it is class war. John R. Tellefson   A Kansas Liberal