A Quote by Phil Gingrey

Spending on largely ineffective programs - although well intentioned - is a detriment to fostering real job growth. — © Phil Gingrey
Spending on largely ineffective programs - although well intentioned - is a detriment to fostering real job growth.
Putting out a newspaper without promotion is like winking at a girl in the dark -- well-intentioned, but ineffective.
Unilateral sanctions on Cuba have been oppressive and largely ineffective, and that's why the public largely supports lifting them.
Sometimes well-intentioned programs can lead to dependency and cause us to forget we have what it takes to attain the American dream.
Within New York City and state, families in need face a confusing hodgepodge of supplemental rental assistance programs, many of which are ineffective individually and all of which are clearly ineffective in the aggregate.
The American people need to know that money is being used effectively because frankly, the nation can't afford careless spending, no matter how well-intentioned.
There is job growth in renewables, there is job growth in energy efficiency and there is job growth in developing innovative industries and technologies to successfully meet the challenge of climate change.
Well, I think the president has clearly submitted us a tight budget, but it's what's called for if we're going to get spending under control and keep the economy moving in the right direction, with economic growth and job creation activity.
Where Republicans encourage popular myths about taxes, spending, and climate change, Democrats tend to stoke our fantasies about the sustainability of entitlement spending as well as about the cost of new programs.
Too often, while well-intentioned, our poverty programs fail the poor. They fail them by keeping them in cycles of dependency.
The Workforce Investment Improvement Act of 2012 would consolidate and eliminate dozens of ineffective or duplicative programs, enhance the role of job creators in workforce development decisions, and improve accountability over the use of taxpayer dollars.
Household spending growth has been particularly solid in 2015, with purchases of new motor vehicles especially strong. Job growth has bolstered household income, and lower energy prices have left consumers with more to spend on other goods and services.
But some people will say you just did these programs. Well, yes, the programs are important and I'm proud of the programs, but mostly I'm proud of the way the San Francisco Symphony plays these programs.
We laugh at liberals who declare that their favorite spending programs should be exempt because the spending is for a noble cause.
Does it sound outrageous to you that military spending for fiscal year 2000 will be almost $290 billion and all other domestic discretionary spending, such as education, job training, housing, Amtrak, medical research, environment, Head Start and many other worthwhile programs will total $246 billion, the biggest disparity in modern times ?
Well, the taxes that everyone else is paying are supporting lots of programs that were in place prior to Obama's new spending. So new spending has too be paid for by new taxes, or by eliminating existing tax breaks. And Obama wants that burden to be borne exclusively by the rich.
In response to the recession, the Obama administration chose to emphasize costly, short-term fixes - ineffective stimulus programs, myriad housing programs that went nowhere, and a rush to invest in 'green' companies. As a consequence, uncertainty over policy - particularly over tax and regulatory policy - slowed the recovery.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!