Quantcast

More than 500 economists, 5 Nobel laureates back Romney’s economic strategy

snipe 2012/08/21 01:58:18
seems bad news comes in bunches. No wonder the Bamster's been a little testy lately.


More than 500 economists — including five Nobel laureates — have
endorsed Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s economic plan
as the right choice for jobs creation and economic growth.


The pro-Romney group “Economists for Romney” announced Monday that its statement of support for the former Massachusetts governor’s economic plan now has 526 signatories, up from 400 a week ago.


“We enthusiastically endorse Governor Mitt Romney’s economic plan to
create jobs and restore economic growth while returning America to its
tradition of economic freedom,” Economists for Romney’s statement of
support reads, proclaiming Romney’s plan as based on “proven
principles” to restrain the federal government and expand opportunities
in the private sector.


The 526 economists — including Nobel laureates Gary Becker, Robert
Lucas, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Myron Scholes — point to
six facets of Romney’s economic approach that they see as beneficial to
future economic success.

  • Reduce marginal tax rates on business and wage incomes and
    broaden the tax base to increase investment, jobs, and living standards.
  • End the exploding federal debt by controlling the growth of
    spending so federal spending does not exceed 20 percent of the economy.
  • Restructure regulation to end “too big to fail,” improve credit
    availability to entrepreneurs and small businesses, and increase
    regulatory accountability, and ensure that all regulations pass
    rigorous benefit-cost tests.
  • Improve our Social Security and Medicare programs by reducing
    their growth to sustainable levels, ensuring their viability over the
    long term, and protecting those in or near retirement.
  • Reform our healthcare system to harness market forces and
    thereby reduce costs and increase quality, empowering patients and
    doctors, rather than the federal bureaucracy.
  • Promote energy policies that increase domestic production,
    enlarge the use of all western hemisphere resources, encourage the use
    of new technologies, end wasteful subsidies, and rely more on market
    forces and less on government planners.

    Seven of the signatories are from Harvard University and five from Columbia
    University — two of President Barack Obama’s alma maters.

    The economists’ statement of support pillories Obama’s economic record,
    claiming that his expansion of the federal government has resulted in “anemic
    economic recovery and high unemployment,” which will continue if his future
    plans are implemented.

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Dee 2012/08/21 02:18:36
    Dee
    +18
    If I ran my household the way Obama is running this country, I'd be living in a box under a bridge.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Dee Kern 2012/08/21 22:49:40
    Dee
    +1
    give me a break...
  • Kern Dee 2012/08/21 22:53:06
    Kern
    So can't answer where all of this "new" spending is coming from? I didn't think so.
  • Dee Kern 2012/08/21 23:31:00
    Dee
    The truth is, I don't want to have a conversation with you. I'm having a little fun with some friends and then you barge in. Blah, blah, blah...Reagan...blah, blah, blah... Republicans...blah, blah, blah. Like I said - give me a break! Go ahead, pat yourself on the back, tell yourself how brilliant you are and how you stuck it to me. Puff that chest waaaay out! Go ahead. I don't care.
  • Kern Dee 2012/08/22 00:47:04
    Kern
    I know, Republicans don't care for the truth. They only care about patting each other back in appreciation of who can repeat the talking points of the day in the most unoriginal way. It's all fun because the truth doesn't matter; it can't matter because it doesn't support the ideology. And, we all know Republicans treat ideology like religions, it's all based on fantasy.

    Have fun in right-wing world; it's a nice place if you lack analytically skills. .
  • Dee Kern 2012/08/22 00:51:52 (edited)
    Dee
    +1
    Hon, I hate to burst your bubble, but I'm not a Republican. And remember when I asked you for your opinion? Yeah, me neither.

    Shoo.
  • marcuss... Kern 2012/08/22 01:03:08
    marcuss LIBERALS ARE TRAITORS
    Seems all you can possibly do is IGNORE THE TRUTH.

    0WEbama promised MILLIONS of JOBS and just like everything else he has done he FAILED MISERABLY at that promise too. He said "If I do not have the deficit cut in half by the end of my first term it will be a ONE TERM proposition"

    0WEbama LIED and people DIED.
  • Kern marcuss... 2012/08/22 01:34:22
    Kern
    He helped create millions of jobs. Remember when Bush said his tax cuts would pay themselves? Yeah me too. Remember when the Republicans said we had to pay for the war? Me either. Remember when the Republicans said the oil would pay for the war? Me too. Remember when we handed out no-bid, cost-plus contracts to Halliburton and Halliburton only, the company that gave Dick Chaney a giant bonus after he got elected? I do. Remember that Dick Chaney still had stock in Halliburton? I do.

    Remember when Republicans tried to work with the Democrats? Me either. Remember when Republican got elected on saying they would create jobs? I do. I also remember that they have put forth zero jobs bills but managed to create more than 100 anti-abortion bills.

    Remember the last time the Republicans passed a balanced budget? I do, it Nixon.

    Nice but I don't deal in talking points. Go play with the kids, you're way, way out of your league.
  • marcuss... Kern 2012/08/22 01:50:09 (edited)
    marcuss LIBERALS ARE TRAITORS
    HELPED CREATE MILLIONS OF JOBS? Where in the 'green' industry?

    Where do the hell do you get he created MILLIONS OF JOBS?

    presidents job chart
  • Kern marcuss... 2012/08/22 03:44:24
    Kern
    The CBO says so, thanks for asking.

    "The economy would have been in much worse shape without the 2009 stimulus — which increased employment in the third quarter of this year by as many as 3.3 million full-time jobs, according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office."

    http://www.politico.com/news/...
  • marcuss... Kern 2012/08/22 13:06:32
    marcuss LIBERALS ARE TRAITORS
    +1
    The CBO also says 0WEbama care will cost 1.7 TRILLION but 0WEbama lied and said it will cost 700 billion so whats your point? Is it that the CBO is wrong?
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/22 12:44:26
    Al C.
    +2
    First of all Obama's never passed a single budget. In fact he couldn't even get one Democrat to vote for his budget. secondly Obama's created more debt in three and a half years than Bush did in eight and if he gets re-elected he'll have created more debt than the previous 43 Presidents combined and bankrupt the country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/22 13:55:11
    Kern
    First of all, the budget comes out of the house so perhaps a civics lesson is order for you. Second, President Obama has presented a budget to the House and they the only time they voted on it was they whittled it down to an amendment. So, keep coming the with retarded Reich wing talking points.

    Please show me ALL of the NEW spending president Obama is doing that is crushing this country. Since (pay attention because it's civics time again) all of the spending bill MUST come from the House of Representatives, and the Republicans have controlled the House for the last two years, who do you think is doing all of this spending?

    Even a less than gifted student of the world such as your self adds up all of the new spending President Obama has done, all 1.4 % of it, it doesn't add up to $5 trillion dollars.

    How about this genius; how about you start to pay attention to the what is really going on and not simply parrot what you hear on Fox.

    President Bush, like all Republicans, spent more than we took in, didn't pay for the wars, didn't pay for Medicare Part D, and didn't pay for his tax cuts, and ran up a bunch of bills we are still paying for. In fact Einstein, we are still paying for the Reagan tax cuts. Do you know what that means? It means that we are paying interest on the fir...



    First of all, the budget comes out of the house so perhaps a civics lesson is order for you. Second, President Obama has presented a budget to the House and they the only time they voted on it was they whittled it down to an amendment. So, keep coming the with retarded Reich wing talking points.

    Please show me ALL of the NEW spending president Obama is doing that is crushing this country. Since (pay attention because it's civics time again) all of the spending bill MUST come from the House of Representatives, and the Republicans have controlled the House for the last two years, who do you think is doing all of this spending?

    Even a less than gifted student of the world such as your self adds up all of the new spending President Obama has done, all 1.4 % of it, it doesn't add up to $5 trillion dollars.

    How about this genius; how about you start to pay attention to the what is really going on and not simply parrot what you hear on Fox.

    President Bush, like all Republicans, spent more than we took in, didn't pay for the wars, didn't pay for Medicare Part D, and didn't pay for his tax cuts, and ran up a bunch of bills we are still paying for. In fact Einstein, we are still paying for the Reagan tax cuts. Do you know what that means? It means that we are paying interest on the first trickle down economic scheme from Reagan and Bush's trickle down economic scheme.

    While president Obama is spending, he merely keeping up with bill give to the country by Republican policies.

    Glad I could help you learn.
    (more)
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/22 14:16:06
    Al C.
    The House passed a budget but Harry Reid wouldn't bring it up for a vote in the Senate and Obama's proposed budget didn't even get one Democratic vote and that's a fact. Bush had a four trillion deficit in eight years and Obama's had a five trillion dollars deficit in only three and a half years, so you better go back to school dumb-dumb because you need to learn a thing or two!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/22 14:36:51
    Kern
    No they didn't pass the budget. The bill they passed was NOT, and I repeat, was NOT the bill sent to them. It was whittled down so that while the numbers used looked the same the way the bill paid for it self was not.

    http://www.washingtontimes.co...

    "Democrats disputed that it was actually the president's plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn't actually match Mr. Obama's budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president's numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan."

    What else can I teach you?
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/22 15:01:54
    Al C.
    This is what actually happened dumb-dumb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it.

    Coupled with the House's rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama's budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year.

    Republicans forced the vote by offering the president's plan on the Senate floor.

    Democrats disputed that it was actually the president's plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn't actually match Mr. Obama's budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president's numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan.

    Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, even challenged Democrats to point out any errors in the numbers and he would correct them — a challenge no Democrats took up.

    "A stunning development for the president of the United States in his fourth year in office," Mr. Sessions said of the unanimous opposition.

    The White House has held its proposal out as a "balanced approach" to beginning to rein in deficits. It calls for tax increases to begin to offset higher spending, and would begin to level off debt as a percentage of the economy by 2022. It would produce $6.4 trillion in new deficits over that time.

    By contr...


    This is what actually happened dumb-dumb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    President Obama's budget suffered a second embarrassing defeat Wednesday, when senators voted 99-0 to reject it.

    Coupled with the House's rejection in March, 414-0, that means Mr. Obama's budget has failed to win a single vote in support this year.

    Republicans forced the vote by offering the president's plan on the Senate floor.

    Democrats disputed that it was actually the president's plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn't actually match Mr. Obama's budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president's numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan.

    Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, even challenged Democrats to point out any errors in the numbers and he would correct them — a challenge no Democrats took up.

    "A stunning development for the president of the United States in his fourth year in office," Mr. Sessions said of the unanimous opposition.

    The White House has held its proposal out as a "balanced approach" to beginning to rein in deficits. It calls for tax increases to begin to offset higher spending, and would begin to level off debt as a percentage of the economy by 2022. It would produce $6.4 trillion in new deficits over that time.

    By contrast the chief Republican alternative from the House GOP would notch just $3.1 trillion in deficits, and three Senate Republican alternatives would all come in below $2 trillion.


    Read more: Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate - Washington Times
    (more)
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/22 17:09:21
    Kern
    Sorry moron, if the President's original bill contained thousands of pages, and the bill voted on by the house DID NOT contain the same pages, it wasn't the same bill. Stupid people don't see that. If the extremely mentally deficient retarded Reich wing party submitted a bill to the House and then someone in the Democrat party changed bill, let's say cutting out 1500 pages before bring it to the floor for a vote, would you say the bill was the same?

    You are being lead around the by the nose idiot. Wake up and learn civics, some history, and how to read.

    Remember dumb dumb, I sent you the link. Unlike retarded Reich wingers like you, I actually read the entire article before posting it. Can you even read? Are you capable of comprehending anything past picking your nose?

    When president Obama put $4 trillion dollars of cuts, which included Medicare and Social Security, on the table, why did the retarded Reich wingers not take ideal? Are you saying that you want to cut less than what President Obama offered?
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/22 17:11:47
    Al C.
    He hasn't cut s@*t and you're full of s@*t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/22 17:48:54
    Kern
    Yes he did. The AMENDMENT brought to the floor was not the BILL sent to the house. If you can't understand that even after reading the article, maybe you have other issues that need to be dealt with, like reading comprehension.

    I suggest Sylvan Learning Centers. They specialize in working with people who have troubles like yours.

    Here's another link that may help you understand this issue.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/p...

    "While the Sessions and Mulvaney bills put forward the same topline numbers as those in the president’s budget, neither offered any specifics. The Sessions legislation was 56 pages long; actual budgets are closer to 2,000 pages long.

    Thus, a White House official said, the Sessions proposal was a “shell that could be filled with a number of things that could hurt our economy and hurt the middle class,” a White House official said. “For example, rather than ending tax breaks for millionaires his budget could hit the revenue target by raising taxes on the middle class and rather than ending wasteful programs, his budget could hit its spending target with severe cuts to important programs.”

    I'm always happy to help you learn. Please let me know if I can assist you further.
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/22 19:01:32
    Al C.
    Keep drinking the Kool-Aid and eating Obamaloney and it will kill you!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/22 19:17:33
    Kern
    Facts equal Kool-Aid and talking points equal truth in your world. Good for you because the makes life a lot easier by eliminating any need to process thoughts of your own.

    Once again when a Republican is forced to face the truth, it quits. Good for you for being consistent.
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/22 19:54:18
    Al C.
    Here's some Obama facts:
    1. The unemployment rate is still well over 8%.
    2. There are twice as many people on public assistance
    today than the day he took office.
    3 He's lowered our credit rating.
    4.There are fewer people working today than the day he
    took office.
    5.He's added $5 trillion to our national debt in only
    three and a half years.
    6.He's never passed a budget.
    7.The poverty rate is esculating especially amongst
    minorities.
    8.He's in the process of ruining the best healthcare
    system in the world.
    9.Energy and food prices are going through the roof.
    10. So much for HOPE and CHANGE huh????????
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/22 20:23:17
    Kern
    1. The unemployment rate is still well over 8%.
    What was the projected economic down turn when he took office? 4%. What was the real economic down turn? 8%. So, even someone with your limited ability can see that even conservative economists underestimated the damage Republican did to the economy.

    2. There are twice as many people on public assistance
    today than the day he took office.

    It's called a recession. Sometimes, when you have one party not doing anything to help, it harder to bounce back.

    3 He's lowered our credit rating.
    Sorry but had you read even one article on this you would understand that the reason the credit rating was lowered was because the the strife in Congress. Let help you understand.

    "Lowering the nation’s rating to one notch below AAA, the credit rating company said “political brinkmanship” in the debate over the debt had made the U.S. government’s ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective and less predictable.” It said the bipartisan agreement reached this week to find at least $2.1 trillion in budget savings “fell short” of what was necessary to tame the nation’s debt over time and predicted that leaders would not be likely to achieve more savings in the future."

    Political Brinkmanship was the cause. What was different this time around? ...































    1. The unemployment rate is still well over 8%.
    What was the projected economic down turn when he took office? 4%. What was the real economic down turn? 8%. So, even someone with your limited ability can see that even conservative economists underestimated the damage Republican did to the economy.

    2. There are twice as many people on public assistance
    today than the day he took office.

    It's called a recession. Sometimes, when you have one party not doing anything to help, it harder to bounce back.

    3 He's lowered our credit rating.
    Sorry but had you read even one article on this you would understand that the reason the credit rating was lowered was because the the strife in Congress. Let help you understand.

    "Lowering the nation’s rating to one notch below AAA, the credit rating company said “political brinkmanship” in the debate over the debt had made the U.S. government’s ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective and less predictable.” It said the bipartisan agreement reached this week to find at least $2.1 trillion in budget savings “fell short” of what was necessary to tame the nation’s debt over time and predicted that leaders would not be likely to achieve more savings in the future."

    Political Brinkmanship was the cause. What was different this time around? Was it the fact that the debt limit was being raised the new issue? Nope. It was the group Republican House members (tea baggers) who took their ignorance about the economy and government with them to Washington that drove down our credit. Nice try though.

    4.There are fewer people working today than the day he
    took office.

    Yes there is. And what have the Republicans done to aliviate this? Why they tried to pass over 100 anti-abortion bills and a slew of deregulation bills. Not a jobs bill in site. It's pure genius I tell you!

    5.He's added $5 trillion to our national debt in only
    three and a half years.

    Can you list all of the new spending President Obama has done that equal $5 trillion dollars? I didn't think so. See, President Obama is merely paying off the bills you guys ran up. If you disagree, send me the proof of all of his new spending. While at it, remember that Bush increased spending by 7% his first term and 8% his second term. President Obama has increased spending by 1.4%. Good luck with that.

    6.He's never passed a budget.

    You need a civics lesson. He can only propose a budget, the Republican controlled house is responsible for passing a budget. So, the House has yet to come up with a budget that is not a Right wing give-away to the top 1%. As Cain used to say, "Blame yourself."

    7.The poverty rate is esculating especially amongst
    minorities.

    And the Republican plan is to cut taxes for the rich which did nothing to help them when Bush was in office. When a recession occurs, jobs are lost everyone.

    8.He's in the process of ruining the best healthcare
    system in the world.

    We pay twice as much for healthcare as every other industrialized nation on the planet and we get less service for it. How is our system the best in the world? Simply saying it is better doesn't make it true.

    9.Energy and food prices are going through the roof.

    Again, the Republicans plan is to lower taxes. How will lower the cost of food? Face it, the only plans Republicans have is to lower taxes and outlaw abortion.

    10. So much for HOPE and CHANGE huh????????

    You're right, I was hoping the Republicans would change into humans. I was wrong.
    (more)
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/23 00:33:09 (edited)
    Al C.
    1. The real unemployment rate is over 11%
    2. Obama himself said that if he didn't turn things around
    he'd be a one term proposition.
    3. The credit rating was lowered because of Obama's
    run away spending.
    4. The only job Obama ever created he gave to Larry
    Sinclair and that job sucked the big one!
    5. Obama said he'd go through the budget with a scalpel
    but instead he spent through the roof.
    6. Obama never wanted a budget because he wants to
    keep spending.
    7. If Obama's doing such a good job then how come
    things are getting any better for the people he's
    supposed to be helping?
    8.If the Democrats would agree to tort reform and to
    allow insurance companies to do business across
    state lines healthcasre costs would be cut in half!
    9.Obama has driven up the cost of everything because
    he's weakened the dollar which means it takes more
    dollars to pay for everything.
    10. HOPE and CHANGE was a scam on all of us!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/23 01:33:19
    Kern
    State the lie, watch the responses come in with the truth, ignore the truth and restate lie. Repeat this process until you believe it.
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/23 01:43:34
    Al C.
    Keep your head in the sand, or up your ass, whatever makes you feel better!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/23 04:14:00
    Kern
    Sure Mr. Party borrow and spend. I'll keep my head in the sand waiting for you to come up any proof for anything you said.

    Another Republican capitulates because it has no evidence that its party has done anything positive for the American people in decades.
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/23 04:16:24
    Kern
    I can only assume you're intllectually stunted becasue you have presented zero evedicne that the Republicans have done anything positve for the American people in decades.
  • Al C. Kern 2012/08/23 10:47:54 (edited)
    Al C.
    +1
    Intllectually is spelled "intellectually" and evedcne is spelled like this "evidence" dumb-dumb!!!!!!!!!!
  • Kern Al C. 2012/08/23 13:44:29
    Kern
    Thanks.
  • Kane Fernau 2012/08/21 02:17:23
    Kane Fernau
    +8
    Funded by Big Oil and evil corporations
  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2012/08/21 02:16:59
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +9
    But But Obama has creepy Krugman and Media Matters -

    Hey, great post
  • snipe Jackie ... 2012/08/21 02:44:39
    snipe
    +4
    I love it when I can deliver bad news for obama!
  • Jackie ... snipe 2012/08/21 13:05:44
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +4
    LOLOL good point
  • RJ~PWCM~JLA 2012/08/21 02:15:13
    RJ~PWCM~JLA
    +8
    Look for The Zero to call all 500 of them right-wing extremists!
  • snipe RJ~PWCM... 2012/08/21 02:45:28
    snipe
    +4
    They're probably already on big Sis's terrorist watch list!
  • Mike 2012/08/21 02:11:33
    Mike
    +10
    We know Romney’s got 505 votes; let’s push him over the finish line with many millions!
  • abubincrazy 2012/08/21 02:08:38
    abubincrazy
    +4
    Cool!
    Can we start tonight?
  • Gracie - Proud Conservative 2012/08/21 02:00:48
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    +9
    That's going to blow away Obama's "most economists" who in reality is only one of his former advisers!
  • Jackie ... Gracie ... 2012/08/21 02:17:44
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +7
    Creep Krugman and Media Matters - his sources
  • Gracie ... Jackie ... 2012/08/21 02:20:51
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    +4
    Krugman is such a loser!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/18 15:50:50

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals