Lucy Powell Quotes

I mean, the Obama position has been, 'We think government ought to be spending this money, not the people who earn it.'

I am a Democrat; I want to fund programs that help people. In order to do that, you need to have revenues and you have revenues when you have jobs.

The President and the Democrats on Congress have exploited the financial crisis to advance their socialist big government tax, spend and borrow agenda.

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.

And taking more money out of the private economy and having the government perform as it has poorly done with the stimulus I don't think is the right way to go.

Republicans believe largely in the market working, Democrats believe stereotypically that you've got to give people something. So why not give people a chance to let the market work for them.

Liberals believe government should take people's earnings to give to poor people. Conservatives disagree. They think government should confiscate people's earnings and give them to farmers and insolvent banks.

Something got screwed up in terms of your priorities if you think it's more important to get rid of the dividend tax than it is to take care of 11 million kids.

President Obama wants to increase the size of government and raise taxes, while I support less government and more individual freedom.

For those of you who don't understand Reaganomics, it's based on the principle that the rich and the poor will get the same amount of ice. In Reaganomics, however, the poor get all of theirs in winter.

What got us out of the depression was capitalism, and we would have gotten out a lot quicker had the government not intervened.

The BBC is locked to the reading of the economy that is run out of Ed Miliband and Ed Balls' office. They think if only you spend and borrow more money you can create growth everywhere.

Well you know I've attracted a lot of criticism by, for example, suggesting that child benefit should be taken away from higher rate taxpaying families.

But only 'rich' people by definition have the 'extra' money to buy things and invest to create economic growth. Do we really want to tax that 'extra' money away - and give it to the government to spend? Does that make any economic sense outside of politics and our emotional desire to make everyone suffer equally through these tough times?

Obama's plan for higher taxes and more spending is a blueprint for perpetual poverty. The last thing America needs is more of the Democrats' class warfare that has left our economy a barren landscape.

People have had certain assumptions in the past about Conservative governments, partly because of some of the things that happened in the 1980s, and partly because of the tone of some of the debate in the 1980s that appeared to say public spending on the arts was something you might want to progressively reduce.

Obama's claim is that he wants to give. The GOP is saying it wants to take.

So if we are really concerned about generating more taxes, we ought to be investing in our people, not taking away the kinds of resources that contribute to their ability to become greater taxpayers in this country.

If we have an economic crisis in the Western world it's because the government makes up 50 percent or more of the economy. This is a cancer that is taking away people's freedom.

The U.S. have printed money; they intend to tax the rich in order to avoid the fiscal cliff. These are things that sees anyone who dares to propose them in Greece and Europe labeled an extremist, when at the same time, it's what Obama does.

At the next General Election, voters face a clear choice: deregulation and less interference in everyday life with the Conservatives, or yet more regulation and interference under Mr Blair.

Republicans spend and borrow, Democrats tax and spend.

A liberal is a man who is willing to spend somebody else's money.

The Republican Party is terrific at determining how a program will impact the federal budget, but we're not nearly as good as the Democrats in explaining to people how our agenda will directly benefit them and their families.

Western–style redistributive programs-progressive taxation, social security, unemployment insurance-should be encouraged, but at least in the short run, they have limited potential. There simply is not enough to tax, and nearly no one can be trusted to transfer revenues.