Hillary Calls for “Looser Regulations” to Help Create More Jobs—In Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya
posted at 10:49 am on September 29, 2012 by Rovin
(CNSNews.com) – Speaking to a group of foreign ministers from Arab nations at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York on Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed support for loosening regulations, particularly on small businesses, because “too many people still can’t find jobs”–in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya.
“In Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, people rose up against their dictators because they were fed up with governments that served the interests of a few at the expense of everyone else,” said Clinton. “But economic and social challenges did not disappear with the dictators. Too many people still can’t find jobs, and young and growing populations crave a sense of opportunity and self-determination.
“On the economic front, we are zeroing in on small and medium-sized enterprises because they are the growth engines in any economy,” Clinton said. “They create the bulk of new jobs and they spread wealth more broadly through more communities. And when people have the opportunity to unleash their talents and create something of their own, they are more invested in their communities, their countries, and their new democracies.
“So the OECD is helping emerging democracies find ways they can loosen regulations and make it easier to start or expand a small business,” she said. (all emphasis mine)
How are those tight regulations working out here at home Mrs. Clinton? She really should be more careful about projecting what real economic reforms might mean to nations hungry for jobs, since this is not the progressive ObamaModel that has suppressed job creation at home.
Recently in the Green Room:
- Sunday reflection: Matthew 4:1-11
- Rand Paul wins CPAC straw poll
- Real question: Does Obama’s budget fund overseas abortions to protect endangered animals?
- Photo of the day: Crimea now belongs to Russia, at least on Russian propaganda TV
- Vatican: Pope Francis wasn’t talking about same-sex relationships; Update: “Civil unions” explained