Meredith Whitney Quotes

If we don't get a grip on government spending, there will be no growth.

Past experience with fiscal austerity at home and overseas strongly suggests that it is best for the economy's long-run performance to restrain government spending rather than raise taxes.

Defense spending as a share of the economy dropped significantly during the early 1990s, and that was one of the things, along with other policy changes, that put us back on the path to a balanced budget.

I think Republicans really need to be disciplined, to stay focused on sustained economic growth.

Austerity is not part of the European treaties; democracy and the principle of popular sovereignty are.

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.

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

We agree with Simpson and Bowles and others who have looked at this. What's necessary is to stabilize the debt and then work from there. You can't balance the budget in the short term because to do that would be to ratchet down the economy.

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

It is better to implement reforms in times of economic strength.

The best deficit reduction program is a growing economy.

Fiscal discipline can turn the economy around.

President Obama has contempt for real money.

Look at what happened in the 1990s: when they balanced the federal budget, it was through growth in the economy and controlling spending.

Getting the budget balanced, regulatory reform, tax reform - I think these lead to economic growth.

Eventually, the economy will work well when you reduce subsidies. People have got used to getting some handouts from governments.

The emphasis so far on fiscal austerity, while to a degree necessary for the countries facing market funding difficulties, is excessive when carried out across the board.

Any move to reduce government spending is a positive for the economy.

Prosperity cannot be restored by raids upon the public Treasury.

Not in the constitution, but I would propose a law to the French parliament that provides for reducing the budget deficit year by year, until we have reached a balanced budget by 2017.

You remember had this gigantic clock in the arena showing the size of the national debt. And Paul told America, if you elect Republicans, we can fix that. But, if Paul Ryan was being honest, he would've pointed to the debt clock and said, we built that.

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.

History speaks pretty clearly that the markets do better with Democrats. Republicans' ideas of what constitutes fiscal responsibility simply are not good for the stock market. Democrats have many tendencies, but one of them is to look after the workers, and actually that tends to be good for demand and good for markets.

Memo to Congress: America's problem is not that government is too small. It's the spending, stupid!

Restore, without delay, the equilibrium between revenue and expenditures, which has done so much to destroy our credit and derange the whole fabric of government. If that should not be done, the government and country will be involved, ere long, in overwhelming difficulties.