Daily Archives: July 26, 2012


Draghi: Central bank can help debt problem; markets cheer

This USA Today story, Draghi: Central bank can help debt problem; markets cheer, quotes the head of the European Central Bank:

Draghi said the “ECB will do whatever it takes to preserve the euro,” apparently providing the assurance markets needed to rally.

The article also presents this explanation:

Marc Ostwald, an analyst at Monument Securities, welcomed Draghi’s comments that high borrowing rates could hurt the bank’s efforts to control inflation.

I say that if experts need to talk nonsense to justify the correct actions, then let them spout on.

If the ECB’s mandate were restated to one of preventing flation of any kind, de or in, then they would not have to turn language on its head to justifying doing what they need to do.


Obama’s Full Remarks On Guns From Urban League Speech

Talking Points Memo has a transcript of Obama’s Full Remarks On Guns From Urban League Speech. I don’t believe these have been conveniently edited to make it seem that Obama said the opposite of what he actually said.  I think the excerpt below is also faithful to the spirit of what he said.

But what I said in the wake of Tucson was we were going to stay on this, persistently.  So we’ve been able to take some actions on our own, recognizing that it’s not always easy to get things through Congress these days.  The background checks conducted on those looking to purchase firearms are now more thorough and more complete.  Instead of just throwing more money at the problem of violence, the federal government is now in the trenches with communities and schools and law enforcement and faith-based institutions, with outstanding mayors like Mayor Nutter and Mayor Landrieu – recognizing that we are stronger when we work together.

So in cities like New Orleans, we’re partnering with local officials to reduce crime, using best practices.  And in places like Boston and Chicago, we’ve been able to help connect more young people to summer jobs so that they spend less time on the streets.  In cities like Detroit and Salinas, we’re helping communities set up youth prevention and intervention programs that steer young people away from a life of gang violence, and towards the safety and promise of a classroom.

But even though we’ve taken these actions, they’re not enough.  Other steps to reduce violence have been met with opposition in Congress.  This has been true for some time – particularly when it touches on the issues of guns.  And I, like most Americans, believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms.  And we recognize the traditions of gun ownership that passed on from generation to generation -– that hunting and shooting are part of a cherished national heritage.

By contrast, Mitt Romney seems to have said that he doesn’t think there needs to be any new laws about guns.  As John Stewart pointed out in his commentary, there are people who think we need to pass laws about wearing costumes to movie theaters.  Perhaps Romney thinks this is the way to solve the problem.  Costumes are certainly not protected by the Second Amendment although they might be protected by the First Amendment.

So if we have a complaint about society, would it be better to protect our right to say something before we protect our right to shoot something?


Senate Passes Tax Cuts For The First $250,000 Of Income For All

ABC News has the article Senate Passes Cuts for All but Richest Americans. As one comment posted on the article says, a better headline would be the one I chose.

“With the Senate’s vote, the House Republicans are now the only people left in Washington holding hostage the middle-class tax cuts for 98 percent of Americans and nearly every small business owner,” Obama said in a written statement.

On the Republican side, we have the statement:

Republicans say raising taxes on higher earners saps money from business owners who would otherwise create jobs. Democrats say that’s overblown.

To say that the Republican point of view is overblown, is putting it rather mildly. I prefer Harry Reid’s comments:

“Here we go again,” Reid muttered. Some of McConnell’s remarks, he added, were “poppycock.”

It does not make any difference how low you make the taxes, a business owner would be a fool to create more jobs when there aren’t enough customers to keep the existing employees busy.  As self-proclaimed experts on capitalism, how could the Republicans be so dumb as to pretend not to understand this?  In fact, I bet that most Republicans are not that dumb.  They just think the electorate is that dumb.  So far the facts seem to be proving them out on this judgment.