Who said this: Obama or Hoover?
This is a brief follow-up to my post yesterday proclaiming that this is looking more like Hoover every day. Credit Writedowns reader Greg came across the statement below. Who said it, Herbert Hoover or Barack Obama?
The whole of the administrative officials are cooperating with the special Economy Committee appointed by the House of Representatives in the drive to bring about further drastic economies in Federal expenditure…
Nothing is more important than balancing the budget with the least increase in taxes. The Federal Government should be in such position that it will need issue no securities which increase the public debt after the beginning of the next fiscal year, July 1.
If you don’t know, that should tell you something.
P.S. – when I am back to full blogging detail, I am going to write an update to this post and this one too.
The point of the Tea party is to reduce policy options for the President so that they hold him responsible for the collapsing economy. Obama started looked like FDR on inauguration. He now looks more and more like Hoover and a one term president.
What president was this said about – Hoover, Obama or Roosevelt? Was it said by Paul Krugman? —
“I think back to the events of [date], with a sick heart. For then … the nationalization of banks by President XXX
could have been accomplished without a word of protest. It was President XXX’s great mistake.”
What candidate said this on the campaign trail – Ross Perrot, Roosevelt, Bachman or Obama?
“One of these great problems — and a very vital one to my family and your family and to the whole community — is the financial problem of making both ends meet.
It is my opinion that in the conduct of national finances, as in the conduct of corporation finances or family budgets, if things are not going as well as one had hoped, it is far better to face the truth than to try to hide it.
We all know that our own family credit depends in large part on the stability of the credit of the United States. And here, at least, is one field in which all business — big business and little business and family business and the individual’s business — is at the mercy of our big Government down at Washington, D. C.
What I should like to do is to reduce, as far as possible, the problem of our national finances to the terms of a family budget. The credit of the family depends chiefly on whether that family is living within its income. And that is equally true of the nation. If the nation is living within its income, its credit is good. If, in some crises, it lives beyond its income for a year or two, it can usually borrow temporarily at reasonable rates. But if, like a spendthrift, it throws discretion to the winds, and is willing to make no sacrifice at all in spending; if it extends its taxing to the limit of the people’s power to pay and continues to pile up deficits, then it is on the road to bankruptcy.
Yet, that new budget, recommended neither increased taxes nor decreased expenditures, although upon its recommendations depended the credit standing of the United States. This Administration produces statements like :”Nor do we look with great concern upon this moderate deficit,” and, again, “Our Government finances are in a sound condition.” “
You should have quoted more of the final paragraph:
“Nothing is more important than balancing the budget with the least increase in taxes. The Federal Government should be in such position that it will need issue no securities which increase the public debt after the beginning of the next fiscal year, July 1. That is vital to the still further promotion of employment and agriculture. It gives positive assurance to business and industry that the Government will keep out of the money market and allow industry and agriculture to borrow the monies required for the conduct of business.