Comments about ‘Robert Bennett: Candidates need economic policy to win’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Feb. 6 2012 12:04 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoeBlow
Miami Area, Fl

"the nature of the "jobless recovery" had little to do with government policy"

Does anyone really believe that the unemployment numbers would be vastly different had McCain won the election?

This kind of statement is the reason Mr Bennett no longer has his old job.

It is not acceptable to speak ones opinion unless it attacks and demonizes the other side.

Earl
Sandy, UT

"The winning candidate will be the one that offers the most coherent economic policy to a country that is hurting."

That has never been true, and it won't be true in this upcoming election. Economic illiteracy and the convoluted pronouncements of Keynesians in charge of economic policy guarantee that coherence will be MIA in the upcoming election campaigns. That's why Ron Paul is ignored as an "extremist" with utopian or fringe economic beliefs. His are the only coherent policies among the various candidates.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

Running for POTUS for 6 years.
Raising more money than your opponents.
"Carpet bombing" your competitors.
All the above seems to being the winning formula.

Economic Policy with observable and measurable objectives, goals and timelines?

Who needs stuff like that?

David King
Layton, UT

@Earl
Well said!

I just have a couple of problems with the way Mitt Romney speaks about the economy. I've heard him say that government doesn't create jobs, but also that he will turn the economy around. Is he going to run the economy or leave it to the free market? If he truly believes government shouldn't run the economy, it would be more accurate to say "I will let the market turn the economy around." It's also interesting that he criticizes the President as not believing strongly enough in the free market, while he himself supported both the bank bailout by President Bush and President Obama's stimulus program. There's nothing "free market" about bailouts for companies giving bonuses to CEO's while handing the bill to taxpayers.

At any rate, we haven't had a serious discussion about what actually caused our current mess. Some say it was a lack of regulation on Wall Street. Austrian economists (who were talking predicting this crisis several years before it happened) point to the Fed's policy of easy credit, and laws that required companies to make dangerous loans. If you believe in the free market, you need to understand Austrian economics.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

I heard Pres. Obama's plan.
Like it or not, at least he has something.

6 years of Mitt -- and all I've heard is "Vote for me, I'm not Obama".
And that's his schtick with just the GOP.

What voters what is the "How"?

Obama will win 2012, unless Mitt or someone else comes up with a "better" plan.

"Vote for me, I'm not Obama",
relying on Good looks,
and Fancy parties with the popular crowd
is a you get to be elected Student Body President.

Remember -- HOW are you going to do it better.

JoCo Ute
Grants Pass, OR

According to Romney "corporations are people". He is right on, as corporations have legal standing, can sue and be sued, own property etc. It's time to end welfare to these "people." Mr. Bennetts' comment that "Our educational system is not providing enough of the kind of workers our modern economy needs" is also right on.

Under Eisenhower in the 1950's corporations paid 36% of total taxes, under Reagan the % of taxes paid by corporations dropped to 17% and under Bush Jr. corporations paid a mere 6%. Yet corporations continue to use the roads, expect police and fire service, use the court system, expect military protection of their ships at sea and expect the educational system to produce qualified employees. . . all for paying only 6% of our total taxes.

Enough corporate welfare, it's time for corporations to pay their fair share. Let them pay for the educational system they expect and for all other services as well.

lket
Bluffdale, UT

you where a better man then the guy that replaced you. i am not a party guy but you would work a little with the other party and that is missing now. americans used to argue all day party stuff, but then they punched out a deal. many of the tea party people dont believe in that america. small goverment is all they can say. well our goverment people are americans too. so if we make it smaller people lose jobs. it wont happen anyway because the big companies make too much money selling to the goverment. the market and goverment are more conected then people think. anyway thanks for being a good guy, when you could. not many are.

Owl
Salt Lake City, UT

Well said Mr. Bennett. Obama has jobs as his campaign objective since his candidacy began. There is little evidence that his plans have been effective over and above an otherwise unassisted recovery. Hollywood loves him, labor unions love him, academics love him, the wealthy in NYC love him, but those who create durable jobs, unlike the illusory Solyndra jobs, are still waiting for something of substance from our president or any candidate.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments