Cal Cunningham Quotes

In all free trade agreements there are winners and losers.

Climate change: Don't undermine the science just because you don't like the economics

Going on and getting good bilateral agreement is a better way [than Trans-Pacific Partnership agreements], and I'm fine with that strategy. I think that strategy can work as well.

Notwithstanding all the passionate fulminations of the spokesmen of governments, the inevitable consequences of inflationism and expansionism...are coming to pass. And then, very late indeed, even simple people will discover that Keynes did not teach us how to perform the 'miracle...of turning a stone into bread,' but the not at all miraculous procedure of eating the seed corn.

We all either work for rich people or we sell stuff to rich people, so just punishing rich people is as bad for the economy as punishing anyone. Let's not punish anyone.

The unpopularity of economics is the result of its analysis of the effects of privileges. It is impossible to invalidate the economists demonstration that all privileges hurt the interests of the rest of the nation or at least a great part of it.

Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue; or in any manner affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a new harvest to those who watch the change and can trace its consequences; a harvest reared not by themselves but by the toils and cares of the great body of their fellow citizens. This is a state of things in which it may be said with some truth that laws are made for the few not for the many.

War prosperity is like the prosperity that an earthquake or a plague brings...but no one has for those reasons yet sought to celebrate earthquakes and cholera as stimulators of the productive forces in the general interest.

If we start thinking simply nationally, and we start having policies that try and restrict the benefits only within our borders, and try and implement protectionist measures as a consequence, this will not have the effect we need to have on the global economy. And that's ultimately the global economy that's pulling most of us down, particularly countries like Canada, that aren't the source of these current economic troubles.

Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumer prices, and weaken the nation's global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures.

I don't think this wall [Donald Trump wants to build], having the - there's no way to force them to, but expecting the Mexicans to pay for it doesn't make any sense either.

Brexit has shrunk the market opportunities. Exiting trade deals will do the same for the U.S. Those deals must be actively shaped and governed to make growth more inclusive.

I truly believe that America's greatness and billions and billions of dollars of our wealth flows away because China doesn't treat us fairly.

I'’m generally in favor of economic globalization. Having said that, it doesn’t always work and does not immediately work in the interest of all. There are sufferers.

If trade undermines life, narrows it or impoverishes it, then it can destroy the world. If it enhances life, then it can better the world.

Obama has paid and will continue to pay dearly for betting on his stimulus package. Because of it, the Bush recession is becoming the Obama recession much faster than it would have had he adopted a more gradual approach to solving economic problems. By jumping in immediately, as he did, in order to increase government spending and pass eight years of Democratic dreams in one day, he made the public expect a solution.

There are lots of small businesses in Britain that have a pretty tough time but many of them are also parts of supply chains, the leave side roll out JCB but that's one company, all the experts are saying the economy would take a big hit if we came out of the EU.

When you talk about taxing the rich, you're taxing capital, and taxing capital results in damage to more than just the wealthy.

Diesel fuel is too important to our farmers at harvest time and to the truckers delivering commerce across Nebraska to allow a bureaucratic hurdle to slow the delivery of fuel.

America has hundreds of billions of dollars of losses on a yearly basis - hundreds of billions with China on trade and trade imbalance, with Japan, with Mexico, with just about everybody. We don't make good deals anymore.

If the US economic landing is soft there will be no consequences (for Europe).

In a globalized economy, it's very difficult for the U.K. to go it alone. Don't listen to politicians. Politicians say if the U.K. leaves, things will be better. I'm telling you, leaving could make things worse.

The policy goal is to persuade China to stop cheating. But here's what's interesting - Donald Trump intuitively understands what things should be. I did a study in 2008 where I estimated the impact of China's unfair trade practices on their competitive advantage - the so-called China Price. You know what it came out to be? Forty-three percent. Forty-three percent - very close to what his intuition said we needed in order to equalize things.

What [Donald] has put up for question is this idea of tariffs. Initially, he said if China won't stop taking advantage of us and manipulating their currency, then I will put tariffs in place. That spooked everybody because if you charge China a fee and an extra tariff for anything they bring into the United States, what's going to happen is that companies carrying those goods are going to raise prices. It's going to be expensive for people. People got scared of that, but then he walked that [idea] back. I don't think anybody is expecting heavy tariffs on anything.

Speaking as somebody who voted against TPA and has a lot of suspicions about Trans Pacific Partnership that are reflected in our concerns about what's hurting the American economy and what the opportunity is to grow, I have to say I like a person like Hillary Clinton who is willing to analyze the facts. I have met no one smarter than her in politics.