Policy Response Quotes

If the press knows about a problem, big or small, that problem is far more likely to receive the personal attention of senior policy makers, then if it remains a well-kept secret.

People can change the volume, the location and the composition of their income, and they can do so in response to changes in government policies.

Monetary policy will, as always, respond to the economy's twists and turns so as to promote, as best as we can in an uncertain economic environment, the employment and inflation goals.

We will watch very carefully what is happening in the economy and adjust policies appropriate.

We need to keep in mind the well-established fact that the full effects of monetary policy are felt only after long lags. This means that policy makers cannot wait until they have achieved their objectives to begin adjusting policy.

There is a policy response that needs to occur. There is also a technical response that needs to occur. It is the development community that can really craft the solutions and make sure we are safe.

Unless and until Barack Obama addresses the full depth of Americans' anger with his full arsenal of policy smarts and political gifts, his presidency and, worse, our economy will be paralyzed.

If the program goes off track again due to recession, this should not become a pretext for the imposition of more austerity measures.

When the Australian Government looked at how to meet the challenges, and the opportunities, presented by our ageing population, it saw that an all-encompassing approach was a prerequisite.

What people demand is what the policies serve.

It is a fact that governments tend to put in place policies and strategies in response to current scenarios.

Instead of serving special interests, Congress should focus on the big picture. Globalization and technology have completely reshaped our economy in recent decades, and if we don't respond, we're putting the future of the middle class at risk.

The fear among economists across the political spectrum that was - was that we were rapidly plummeting towards a second Great Depression. So, in the weeks and months that followed, we undertook a series of difficult steps to prevent that outcome. And we were forced to take those steps largely without the help of an opposition party, which, unfortunately, after having presided over the decision-making that had led to the crisis, decided to hand it over to others to solve.

If this really is true, then greed really isn't good, after all. It really isn't the way to maximize the best possible outcome. We really do need to come together and act collectively. Government isn't always the problem. It's sometimes the solution. And, so their whole intellectual scaffolding collapses. So, they'd rather deny the science.

My interest is to establish an agenda of engagement with Mexicans that will respond to Mexicans' most urgent needs.

In the real world, answers may not be clear cut. There will be messy choices, and you're not going to be able to construct a policy response in a neat and tidy way. Being able to listen to other people, even as you stay true to your principles, that's how you actually succeed.

In policy arena after policy arena, Democrats respond to every failure of clunky government by proposing the addition of still more layers to 1960s-era bureaucracies as they break down.

Technology is moving quickly. Policy is not moving as quickly.

You've got to respond to that and of course thinking through the role of a left party in the modern world, in the modern economy and society and having a policy response to that.

Stop thinking about global warming as a future threat and understand it instead as a present emergency, one that requires a far stronger policy response than we'd imagined.

To the extent that congressional powers have ebbed as a result of failure to develop timely and coherent responses to public problems, Congress has only itself to blame for its own predicament.

People ask, 'Is the science going to run ahead of the ethics?' I don't think that's always the problem. I think it's that the science runs ahead of the politics. Bioethics can alert people to something coming down the road, but it doesn't mean policy and politicians are going to pay attention. They tend to respond when there's an immediate crisis. The job of the ethicist, in some ways, is to warn or be prophetic. You can yell loudly, but you can't necessarily get everybody to leave the cinema, so to speak.