While most people in Washington are focused on the political implications of adding Paul Ryan to the GOP ticket, my only concern is trying to limit the size and scope of government so we can enjoy more freedom and prosperity.
In this debate for PBS, I explain that the Ryan budget would boost the economy – but only if Republicans actually followed through on their rhetoric and did the right thing after obtaining power.
A few comments on the debate. I channel the wisdom of Mitchell’s Golden Rule by saying the most important goal is restraining the growth of federal spending.
I fully agree with Jared that the GOP economic plans won’t work if Republicans get squeamish about doing what’s best for America. If Romney wins, and does a repeat of the statist Bush years, the GOP will deserve to be cast out of power for decades.
At the end of our interview, I obviously disagreed with Jared’s embrace of the Keynesian fantasy that more government spending magically increases growth. If I was feeling mean, I could have pointed out that he was the co-author of the infamous report claiming that Obama’s so-called stimulus would keep unemployment below 8 percent.
I also appeared on Bloomberg TV to comment on Ryan’s economic plan.
It won’t surprise regular readers of this blog that I emphasized the importance of restraining the growth of government so that the burden of the public sector shrinks as a share of overall economic output.
In my second soundbite, I make a simple point about the Laffer Curve. As we saw in the 1980s, lower tax rates don’t automatically mean lower tax revenues.
I also point out the similarities between what Paul Ryan is proposing today with what was achieved in the 1990s during the Clinton Administration.
[…] that government spending is a brain tumor and red ink is the headache caused by the tumor when seeking to help people understand that it’s important to focus on the disease and not the symptom. But to show that I’m not just […]
[…] that government spending is a brain tumor and red ink is the headache caused by the tumor when seeking to help people understand that it’s important to focus on the disease and not the symptom. But to show that I’m […]
[…] I Don’t Know if Ryan Will Help Romney Win, but His Budget Would Help the Economy […]
The only way Romney can balance his budget is to destroy Medicare.
Check out the photo that illustrates the concept. (Spoof.)
[…] shifting Wisconsin because of Paul Ryan. As for Iowa, I’m going by nothing but gut instinct. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this. […]
[…] shifting Wisconsin because of Paul Ryan. As for Iowa, I’m going by nothing but gut instinct. Rate this:Share […]
I also think that the Romney/Ryan ticket would be a better choice not only for the U.S. but for my country as well. Most Canadians were disappointed when President Obama didn’t approve the Keystone pipeline project and thus destroyed a promising prospect on the way to the economic recovery in both countries. More importantly, the interconnection between Canada and the U.S. is benefical not only for our national economy as a whole but also for the economic development in Canada’s regions which could best be seen when the recovery in the U.S. motor vehicle market positively influenced Toronto’s leading automotive industry. However, I’m afraid that Obama’s decisions could threaten such positive economic development and worsen the relationship between Canada and the U.S.
I marvel that thinking, “informed”, educated people still deny the success of supply-side economics when the data are clear: household income rose, inflation was slashed, millions of net new jobs were created… I have to conclude that these “informed”, educated people know the truth and are simply lying.
[…] Mitchell explains how Paul Ryan’s budget would help the economy. I don’t necessarily trust Ryan, but I do trust Mitchell. This is worth your […]
[…] a Wall Street Journal editorial saying nice things about the Ryan budget. And I also have done a couple of TV interviews explaining how that plan would do a good job of controlling the burden of government […]
[…] already done a couple of TV interviews on Ryanomics vs Obamanomics and the Wall Street Journal this morning published my column explaining […]
Paul Ryan’s main appeal is his willingness to engage in entitlement reform which is very important for the long term health of our country. On spending however his plan is pretty lousy. I’m not sure it would even pass Dan’s golden rule since a 3.1% growth rate for federal spending seems as likely as not to exceed the growth rate of private spending in the near to mid term.
In the end the choice is simple, do you want Socialism/ Marxism or do you want Freedom, Free Enterprise, Supply Side Economics, Less Government, Less Regulation, Secure Borders, Jobs and the American Dream. Obama doesn’t believe in the American Dream, as has his father’s anti American dream and he is doing all he can to stop us from having ours. The right choice is as clear as a perfectly blue sky.VOTE FOR ROMNEY! Mrs. Conservative US 2012 on Facebook. (Civil discussion is always welcome.)
The economy will do fine on its own, once the government is out of the way.
Hey Cato, stop snorting so much Koch