Gita Gopinath Quotes

We should reduce total government spending as a percentage of the economy. The left wants to focus on the deficit so they can take us away from the focus on spending as a percentage of the economy.

We are worried about the size of the deficit, which is why the president is pleased that the House and Senate have followed his lead in cutting the deficit in half over the next five years.

Of course we have to address the deficit if we win.

First of all, I don't like to speak about austerity. I'd prefer to speak of fiscal discipline. Fiscal discipline, in the end, amounts to austerity if it is not accompanied by other policies.

I was the chairman of the House Budget Committee and one of the chief architects the last time we balanced a budget, and it was the first time we had done it since man walked on the moon. We had a $5 trillion surplus and we cut taxes.

Cutting budget deficits can never be just an exercise in economics.

When Bill Clinton was in town, he sent over a balanced budget.

The real goal should be reduced government spending, rather than balanced budgets achieved by ever rising tax rates to cover ever rising spending.

In the past, proactive fiscal polices almost always meant just more investment and an increase in the fiscal deficit.

Sequestration was not designed to be anyone's ideal method for getting our hands around government spending, and it certainly isn't mine.

The deficit - the U.S. knows our deficit is too large. We are committed to bringing it down. We are bringing it down. The deficit came in for fiscal year '05 at considerably below where it was the prior year.

Instead of focusing on growing jobs and reigniting our economy, President Obama focused on growing government and tried to remake the United States into the image of the debt-laden countries of Europe. His approach has been more spending, more regulation, and higher taxes.

We should reduce total government spending as a percentage of the economy.

If you ask people do you think that government should spend less money than what it takes in, most people agree with that.

My opponent Senator Menendez and his colleagues are pursuing what I consider a Jon Corzine economic policy. Higher taxes, more spending, more debt.

Monetary discipline forces fiscal discipline on the politicians as well.

As long as we're focused on spending, there are only two ways to do that: One is spend less, and Democrats have no solutions for that. Or we have pro-growth policies that make the economy grow so the dead-weight cost of government becomes a smaller percentage of the economy and therefore less expensive.

We have a spending problem, not a taxing problem. The less we spend, the more jobs we have the potential to create.

The successful conduct of economic policy is possible only if there is - and is seen to be - full agreement between the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The biggest source of getting the country to a balanced budget is not by raising taxes or by cutting spending. It's by encouraging the growth of the economy.

The single greatest force for deficit reduction is a growing economy.

I believe very firmly that we can get to balanced budgets without raising taxes and without cutting transfers to the provinces or to individuals.

I think the government lost control over fiscal policy in UPA-2. But it is possible to suggest that the momentum of the populism of UPA-1 did the damage when the economy slowed down, but government spending could not.

There is nothing more important for a government than getting its budget through.

But I think the global economy will understand that the United States has the ability to meet its obligations. But it's not going to be able to do it over the long term if we can't control the growth of government.