A Quote by Marsha Blackburn

Defense of free markets is where we need to be when establishing a vision for national technology policy. — © Marsha Blackburn
Defense of free markets is where we need to be when establishing a vision for national technology policy.
I like Ronald Reagan, who didn't play crass politics, and he just articulated and delivered on broad themes that were needed. Free markets meant free markets. Deregulation. Lower tax rates. Strong national defense. And he was credible and believable.
The United States should.... avoid unilateral export controls and controls on technology widely available in world markets. Unilateral controls penalize U.S. exporters without advancing U.S. national security or foreign policy interests.
We need to have a clear moral vision for both our foreign policy, and economic policy and policy on racial justice.
Senator Biden was correct by calling for more to look into Governor Cuomo's defense policy. It is clear to me, by researching the governor's record on the issue, that he would be a wildcard on national defense issues.
National defense is the usual pretext for the policy of fleecing the people.
Our greatest foreign policy problem is our divisions at home. Our greatest foreign policy need is national cohesion and a return to the awareness that in foreign policy we are all engaged in a common national endeavor.
These people say free markets are the way to go, but wink, wink, the markets aren't really free. They're just a protectionist racket, and we have to pay for it all on every level. It's really quite extraordinary, and immoral, and illegal. These things need to be named, and shamed, and outed, and mocked, and prosecuted.
Our most important job in Congress is to provide for our national defense, and therefore, every year, Congress allocates funds and determines defense priorities in a bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA.
The jelly-bean eating thug says that national defense is important. But national defense starts at home.
Bottom line: A market approach to national defense would give us a lousy national defense.
I'd like to talk about free markets. Information in the computer age is the last genuine free market left on earth except those free markets where indigenous people are still surviving. And that's basically becoming limited.
The invisible hand is not perfect. Indeed, the invisible hand is a little bit arthritic ... I'm a believer in free markets, but I think we need to be less naïve. We need to accept that markets give us pretty good solutions, but occasionally they will lock in something inferior.
While political and cultural factors are important as explanations for differences in national technology policy and industrial practices, emergent trends in science, engineering and management are leading to new paradigms for high-technology innovation in both Japan and the United States.
We cannot allow anything that's called 'national defense' to justify any and all spending. We need to be very, very careful that we don't overspend and say, 'Oh, that's defense,' when perhaps it isn't.
In order to guarantee security in Europe, we need to strongly confront our defense policy in Europe. And we need a solution to our migration policy to secure the inner security of the E.U.
It's a failure of national vision when you regard children as weapons, and talents as materials you can mine, assay, and fabricate for profit and defense.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!