Posted on 09/06/2011 5:04:17 PM PDT by americanophile
Mitt Romney rolled out a major chunk of his economic agenda yesterday, and we'll say this for it: His ideas are better than President Obama's. Yet the 160 pages and 59 proposals also strike us as surprisingly timid and tactical considering our economic predicament. They're a technocrat's guide more than a reform manifesto.
*** The rollout is billed as Mr. Romney's "plan for jobs and economic growth," and it rightly points out that to create more jobs requires above all faster growth. This may seem like common sense, but it's a notable break from the Obama Administration's penchant for policies that "target" jobs rather than improving overall incentives for job creation. So we have had policies for "green jobs," or construction jobs, or teaching jobs, or automobile jobs, or temporary, targeted tax cuts for jobs—even as the economy struggles. Mr. Romney seems to understand that the private economy will inevitably produce millions of new jobs—in industries and companies we can't predict—when it resumes growing at 3% or more. This is an important philosophical distinction that drives most of the Romney agenda.
So it's good to see the former Massachusetts Governor endorse the House GOP effort to review and approve major new regulations that cost more than $100 million. Mr. Romney also joins the other GOP candidates in vowing to repeal ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank. He'd pull the Energy Department from the role as venture capitalist that it has pursued since the Bush Administration, re-focusing it back on basic research, rather than backing solar companies that go bankrupt.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
As an old professor, I must tell you that first you must READ the ASSIGNMENT. You will find that Romney’s report is well organized into general categories, based on the main principles involved in recovery. The famous 59 points is at the end, and (it seems to me) merely answers the question, “Well, what could we actually do?” Some of the 59 initiatives would be wonderful to see enacted.
This is not a Utopian document: it is a plan for now, moving in the right direction. It is really practical, and at the same timer principled.
I have seen nothing comparable from the mercurial Gov. Perry, he who formerly supported Al Gore. Did he suddenly learn, or is he just an opportunist?
We must be somewhat careful about the nominee for 2012, because the country is probably finished is we cannot oust Obama. He is a born loser. What is we had to go against a really talented leftist? We could be facing a real, “people’s republic” situation.
Moody’s isn’t exactly credible. It wasn’t necessarily a proposition between liquidation and bailout; they could have filed for chapter 11 reorganization like thousands of companies do. McCotter knows where his bread is buttered, that’s all; the auto industry is a sacred cow in his state. By contrast, the bank bailout, was a no-brainer for those who had all the facts. The choice was a stark one - the unapallatable borrowing from the Fed or national and global financial meltdown resulting in a massive depression and a tide of human misery.
I have no problem with the fact that McCotter voted to support the people living in his district and to say that Mooody’s is unreliable is a rather lame reason to refute what McCotter is stating. Even if they were wrong by a third, that would still be a $200 billion hit on the social safety net. In addition, McCotter’s argument against the bank bailout is that there was NO MANDTED RESTUCTURING. Go on McCotter’s website, MCCOTTER2012.COM. Read his white papers, watch his videos and then tell me which Republican candidate is better able to articulate the Conservative message.
Voted with our money.
"to say that Mooody’s is unreliable is a rather lame reason to refute what McCotter is stating."
So then McCotter was wrong when Moody's supported TARP, or was Moody's wrong?
"Even if they were wrong by a third, that would still be a $200 billion hit on the social safety net."
Completely ignores Ch. 11.
"McCotter’s argument against the bank bailout is that there was NO MANDTED RESTUCTURING."
True, and unfortunate, but complete economic collapse was not an alternative. A political vote, nothing more.
"watch his videos and then tell me which Republican candidate is better able to articulate the Conservative message"
Considering that he has zero chance of being elected, it's not very relevant.
Did you read McCotter’s plan for re-structuring the “too big to fail” banks? Are you against credit flowing to small businesses and entrepreneurs to get the economy moving? Do you realize your not in charge of relevance? Which candidate do you support and do you think they could out debate McCotter and also be inteLlectually advanced enough to write a book like McCotter’s SEIZE FREEDOM?
I can name an economic plan in four steps...(bad Name That Tune pun)
A $300 billion burden to the “safety net” would have been preferable to spending twice that in bailouts for union thugs.
A $300 billion hit on the safety net would sink it. In addition, if Chrysler and GM turn it around there is a possibility to recoup the money. That simply isn’t happening with that $300 biilion. Are you comfortable with eliminating the jobs that would go along with GM/Chrysler going nunder? Glass, tires, autoparts, mechanics, etc. Most of those are non union jobs. Your good with that?
It’s called Chapter 11. It’s called the free market. How many of those other jobs were still eliminated with the forced closings of all those dealerships?
i’d like to hear more on his plans. at least he has a detailed plan. and i do know that 5% of course is more than 0.
The built in baseline increase is historically 5 to 10%.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.