In response to:

An Economic 'Plan'?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 11, 2012 11:34 AM
So, Allison, you disappeared from the Adams article when I asked you a pointed question. Was that a coincidence? Let's have a comment here about the subject of the column: do you believe that the economy is more likely to recover when the government gets out of its way or when every possible obstacle is put in its way (EPA stops drilling and fracking, HHS implements Obamacare additional taxes, Dodd Frank implements a host of new regulations involving $billions in additional compliance expense, Obamacare makes it expensive to hire new employees (especially for small businesses w/close to 50 employees), government budgets continue at 25% of GDP (crowding out private enterprise), tax rates are allowed to rise (expecially on small...
Kenneth L. Wrote: Sep 11, 2012 11:37 AM
(eSpecially on small businesses when the "Bush" tax rates are allowed to increase), etc., etc.

Which economy would you be more comfortable placing a bet on, Obama's or anybody BUT Obama's?

Former president Bill Clinton told the Democratic National Convention that Barack Obama has a plan to rescue the economy, and only the fact that the Republicans stood in his way has stopped him from getting the economy out of the doldrums.

From all this, and much else that is said in the media and on the campaign trail, you might think that the economy requires government intervention to revive and create jobs. It is Beltway dogma that the government has to "do something."

History tells a different story. For the first 150 years of this country's existence, the federal...