Reagonomics – a blend of monetarism and fiscal Keynesianism swathed in classical liberal and supply-side rhetoric – is in no way going to solve the problem of inflationary depression or of the business cycle.
As a former member of President Obama’s economic team, I have a soft spot for the fiscal stimulus legislation he signed just a month after his inauguration.
One of the greatest falsehoods of American politics over the past several decades is that the Republican party is the party of fiscal responsibility.
With a post Brexit economic policy that sets our economy and country on the right track, with new freedoms, the U.K. will exercise greater fiscal flexibility and regulatory reform to transform our country into a dynamic engine of prosperity, job creation and growth.
As a matter of fact, if you do not take into account, as Congressman Ross just stated, the Social Security surplus, our fiscal deficit, ladies and gentlemen, is over $700 billion today.
We need a mobilized and active civil society using its purchasing power to demand sustainable products and practices. It is also essential that governments commit to the future, creating fiscal and regulatory conditions for sustainable policies to thrive.
Being lectured by the president on fiscal responsibility is a little bit like Tony Soprano talking to me about law and order in this country.
President Obama has ignored or dismissed proposals that would address our anti-competitive tax code and unsustainable trajectory of federal debt – including his own bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform – and submitted no plan for entitlement reform.
My friend Paul Ryan talks about fiscal responsibility, but voted to put two wars on a credit card.
Much fiscal policy is implemented, not through spending increases, but through tax credits and other so-called tax expenditures. The markets should respond to them as they do spending cuts, with little contraction in economic activity.
In the end, the politics of the euro zone weren’t strong enough to create a fully integrated fiscal union with a common banking system, etc.
Even people on the liberal side are starting to worry about going off a fiscal cliff.
Currently, the United States provides 22 percent of the U.N. annual budgets, over $900 million in fiscal year 2007, and some of that funding goes to the Human Rights Council.
The Germans argue – and I can fully understand them – that the euro countries must surrender their sovereignty, because that is the only way to implement budget discipline in a fiscal union.
Now, the president would like to do tax reform, which would obviously lower rates for most people in America and make the tax code fair and get rid of loopholes and special treatment. But absent tax reform, the president believes the right way to get our fiscal house in order is ask the wealthy to pay their fair share.
The right way to deal with a budget problem that was years in the making is by formulating a credible plan to reduce the deficit over time and as the economy is able to withstand the necessary fiscal belt-tightening. That is what President Obama is doing.
Chancellor Angela Merkel and Wolfgang Schaeuble, her finance minister, are right to oppose fiscal and bank unions without political union.
With its record spending and deficits, the Obama administration has shown little interest in taking fiscal responsibility. That is a mistake.
I am in favour of a different Europe, where each state can adopt its fiscal and monetary system.
It’s clear that the medium and long-run fiscal challenges facing the country have to do with the rise of entitlement spending, they have to do with the longer run imbalances that we’ve created in the structure of the system.
For resourceful tech founders, finding capital is rarely a problem; making the best use of it is another story. A few years slinging pepperoni pies and chicken wings – on tiny margins and with minimal investment – might not be the worst fiscal training.
Having your fiscal house in order and having a more manageable macro-economic future is going to be very useful in creating growth.
We are out-of-the-gates strong in fiscal 2015. We grew revenue 8% in the first quarter and exceeded our QuickBooks Online subscriber and our company financial targets.
You have to separate what needs to be done to avoid the fiscal cliff and what needs to be done longer range. It’s a mistake to essentially collapse those two – they’re not the same. I don’t think you can achieve everything at once.
Spending $1 for a brand new house would feel very, very good. Spending $1,000 for a ham sandwich would feel very, very bad. Spending $19,000 for a small family car would feel, well, more or less right. But as with physical pain, fiscal pain can depend on the individual, and everyone has a different threshold.
It’s going to be difficult to stimulate the real economy in the U.S. at a faster rate than 2 percent and perhaps even less if we have that fiscal cliff in December or January 2013.
Every Democrat on Capitol Hill professes to be a fiscal hawk.
Portman embodies the formula for GOP modernization: a conservatism that unapologetically applies the principle of individual freedom consistently to both fiscal and social policy. The senator has breathed new life into a national party grasping for traction with young Americans.
In the perfect world, no one would need pre-nups. But all too often, a misty-eyed romancer at the altar transforms into a vengeful, avaricious fiscal predator when the marriage goes south.
Donors, like voters, increasingly expect candidates to exercise fiscal discipline.
My advice would be, as you consider fiscal policies, to keep in mind and look carefully at the impact those policies are likely to have on the economy’s productive capacity, on productivity growth, and to the maximum extent possible, choose policies that would improve that long-run growth and productivity outlook.
Stemming the tide of special interest campaign cash – and restoring fiscal responsibility in Congress – is no easy task. But there is one place where concerned citizens in both parties can begin: Changing the source of money that funds all campaigns.
Berlin has traditionally backed a rules-based eurozone in which every member state is responsible for its own finances, including bank bailouts, with political union limited to a fiscal overlord’s possessing veto power over national budgets that violate the rules.
Progressives should be willing to talk about ways to ensure the long-term viability of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, but those conversations should not be part of a plan to avert the fiscal cliff.
I think the Tea Party has brought enormous strength to the Republican Party and I absolutely support its fiscal responsibility message, yes.
We have major fiscal problems on our hand.
Let’s push the Pentagon off the fiscal cliff.
Fiscal policy is a very important part of the tool kit for policy makers.
In stabilizing the macroeconomic environment, we have focused on aligning fiscal with monetary policy and nudging the central bank toward the objective of more market-determined exchange rates.
We want to set a tone going into our fiscal year that starts Feb. 1, that Wal-Mart Stores is going to be aggressive in taking care of customers, taking care of our associates, communications and merchandising.
A lot more people are willing to invest in bonds denominated in euros. And there was the fiscal discipline argument, which is that this tied the hands of countries the market hasn’t always trusted, which also helped them borrow at low rates.
Fiscal conservatism is just an easy way to express something that is a bit more difficult, which is that the size and scope of government, and really the size and scope of politics in our lives, has grown uncomfortable, unwieldy, intrusive and inefficient.
This Department of Treasury, run by this administration, using the same tried and true accounting methods that every business in America uses, cast new light on the fiscal severity that our Nation is facing, what some would call a mess.
I think, as Republicans, we need to stick by what we believe in. And that is fiscal conservatism and individual freedom.
Inserting the FCC into our states’ economic and fiscal affairs sets a dangerous precedent and violates state sovereignty in a manner that warrants deeper examination.
Especially today, given the tight fiscal situation that many States and localities face, the use of transportation facilities that pay for themselves without additional Federal funding is essential.
Europe unified its monetary policy through the euro before it unified politically, therefore sustaining member countries’ abilities to pursue the kind of independent fiscal policies that can strain a joint currency.
Budgets don’t balance themselves, it takes fiscal discipline, and both the union and the government will have to show taxpayers that discipline.
It’s the old Washington fiscal game of Jenga. You try to build as much debt as you can take, as much tax as you can take, until you topple the entire economy.
Without a doubt, first thing we should do is clean up our fiscal house, and that starts with balancing our budgets and digging out of this red ink. We cannot expect to continue in this fashion and remain the leader of the free world.
