Quotes About Policies

If we can have record high unemployment, record job loss, and just an absolutely anemic economic recovery because of Obama's policies, and he's not blamed for it, what makes anybody think he's gonna get blamed when an insurance company starts doubling their premiums?

Mr. Trump's fiscal policies have produced more growth than Mr. Obama's because they were designed to incentivize businesses to invest, hire, and produce more here at home. The Obama 'stimulus,' by contrast, went for food stamps, unemployment benefits, ObamaCare subsidies, 'cash for clunkers' and failed green energy handouts.

Some might argue that it's unfair to judge Hillary Clinton for the policies her husband championed years ago. But Hillary wasn't picking out china while she was first lady. She bravely broke the mold and redefined that job in ways no woman ever had before.

Employers who violate rules of fairness are punished by reduced productivity, and merchants who follow unfair pricing policies can expect to lose sales.

President Trump ran on protecting U.S. jobs and renegotiating unfair trade policies - those policies strengthen labor laws around the world.

Obama ran as sane and decent, as though we were electing a mood, and not necessarily a set of policies. Unfortunately, Obama has governed the same way - and misread the mood, which is all there is, really, because being crazy and stupid is all we're really good at politically any more.

One might reasonably wonder whether any amount of failed results would cause liberals to reevaluate the wisdom - and even fairness - of their proposals.

Decades of racist, dehumanizing immigration policies have created systems that have criminalized and traumatized our immigrant neighbors, friends, and families in St. Louis and across our country.

The Fed needs an approach that consolidates the gains of the Greenspan years and ensures that those successful policies will continue - even if future Fed chairmen are less skillful or less committed to price stability than Mr. Greenspan has been.

Both Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama pursued policies of regime change after 9/11 - with Bush removing al-Qaida's safe haven in Afghanistan and the sadistic anti-American dictator Saddam Hussein in Iraq - but Obama took it a step further and disregarded regional stability as a guiding factor for U.S. policy.

We must advocate for policies that stabilize our health care markets, lower premiums and drug costs, protect Medicare and address Nevada's physician residency shortage.

During the formulation of policies, we encourage discussion and listen. We should canvass opinions from all sectors of society - especially relevant stakeholders, those who work on the front line, and the youth - with a view to seeking consensus in society.

With the policymaking process, you have an idea, and you try to sell other stakeholders on the idea. That's not much different than in business, where you're trying to find capital to make your idea a reality.

It takes a tough, stand-up governor to stand up to the president of the United States - speaking out against the president, speaking out against his policies and, more than that, having actual policies that will help expand health care while... Trump is trying to diminish it for Illinois families.

If you want to know what the biggest thing in your way to an improved standard of living, higher pay, a more rewarding career is: Barack Obama and the Democrat Party and their economic policies. They are the roadblock.

The Scouts are a private organization and have every right to set their own membership standards.

We therefore must keep the faith, despite the defeat of policies, because men pass with their policies whilst generations follow each other.

To base one's rejection of what exists--and hence one's prescription for a better world--upon the petty frustrations of one's youth, as surely many middle-class radicals have done, is profoundly egotistical. Unless consciously rejected, this impulse leads to a tendency throughout life to judge the rightness or wrongness of policies by one's personal emotional response to them, as if emotion were an infallible guide.

I think for voters what matters is the values that drive the government.

In the US, there is basically one party - the business party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies. By and large, I am opposed to these policies. As is most of the population.

Now, where are [Mexican illegal immigrants] fleeing from? Mostly from Central America, where they're fleeing from the results of our policies.

They declare that it is unpatriotic and disruptive to question the workings of authority--but patriotic to institute harsh and regressive policies that benefit the wealthy, undermine social programs that serve the needs of the great majority, and subordinate a frightened population to increased state control.

That is neoliberal democracy in a nutshell: trivial debate over minor issues by parties that basically pursue the same pro-business policies regardless of formal differences and campaign debate. Democracy is permissible as long as the control of business is off-limits to popular deliberation or change; i.e. so long as it isn't democracy.

The economic consequences of these policies have been the same just about everywhere, and exactly what one would expect: a massive increase in social and economic inequality, a marked increase in severe deprivation for the poorest nations and peoples of the world, a disastrous global environment, an unstable global economy and an unprecedented bonanza for the wealthy.