Climate change skeptics running out of excuses...

Eugene Robinson's column today talks about a climate change skeptic that decided he would disprove all the global warming science and ended up proving it himself.

I'm guessing the Republican Party will disavow this guy pretty quickly now that he hasn't fallen in line with the ideology. The future will talk about today's Right Wing like the way the church is described today for executing Copernicus for saying the sun is at the center of our solar system. Of course, if there is a future since we may not survive it based on the science proven in the op-ed.

Jon Huntsman makes no one happy...

In an op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal, former Utah Governor, former US Ambassador to China, and current Republican Presidential Candidate Jon Huntsman complains about Too Big To Fail and the Dodd-Frank Act. However, he says the following, which will not be well received on the Right:

"Congress should explore reforms now being considered by the U.K. to make the unwinding of its biggest banks less risky for the broader economy. It could impose a fee on banks whose size exceeds a certain percentage of the GDP to cover the cost they would impose on taxpayers in a bailout, thus eliminating the implicit subsidy of their too-big-to-fail status. Congress could also implement tax reform that eliminates the deduction for interest payments that gives a preference to debt over equity, thus ending subsidies for excess leverage."

Hmm, a model based on one from a European country? Strike 1 says the Republican Party that prefers fake "American exceptionalism" over logic and reason any day of the week (and twice on Sunday). Impose a fee on banks that are too big? This is Socialism (as they see it) by having the government try to limit the size of a business; strike 2! Tax reform that eliminates the deduction for interest payments? Hey, that's a corporate tax increase! Strike 3!

Then he says the following:

"Once too-big-to-fail is fixed, we could then more easily repeal the law's unguided regulatory missiles, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. American banks provide advice and access to capital to the entrepreneurs and small business owners who have always been our economic center of gravity. We need a banking sector that is able to serve that critical role again. Otherwise the sector's endgame will be continental Europe—an unsustainable socialist state and the death of entrepreneurship."

This very obviously misses the point of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, whose job is akin to the Better Business Bureau and protects consumers from those de-regulated companies that are allowed to profit from taking advantage of consumers since there is no regulation to prevent them from acting unethically. So the Democrats that liked you (like the guy that appointed you Ambassador to China) won't like this op-ed piece either.

You're usually a reasonable sounding guy Jon but the policy analyst that wrote this piece for you (FYI, politicians don't write op-eds for themselves. Someone writes it for them.) clearly doesn't share your sense of reason.

CTJ: Warren Buffett Is Right, the Wall Street Journal Is Wrong

Citizens for Tax Justice explains how Warren Buffett is right and The Wall Street Journal is wrong:

"Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, called for higher taxes for millionaires in a widely-noted op-ed this week. As expected, the Wall Street Journal reacted with a variety of misleading counter-arguments. We conclude that:

1. Buffett is correct that the tax breaks that benefit the wealthy investor class, like the capital gains and dividends preferences, are unfair.
2. The Wall Street Journal’s arguments that these types of investment income are double-taxed are incorrect.
3. Contrary to what the Journal claims, President Obama’s tax plan is in keeping with Buffett’s call for higher taxes on millionaires."

Read the whole post for more. Well done, CTJ. Well done.

What was that excuse again Governor?

The Wall Street Journal's Wealth Report posts that in spite of the ludicrous theory on the right that a so-called "millionaire's tax" drives millionaires out of such states, a recent study shows nothing can be further from the truth. This flies in the face of Gov. Chris Christie's veto last year of a millionaire's tax in New Jersey, probably the most practical place where one should exist.

This brings to mind two questions:
1. How would the right play down empirical evidence contradicting their ideology this time?
2. How did someone from The Wall Street Journal get away with posting something on their website that disagreed with long-held Republican positions?

You did WHAT on your hands?!?

Interesting article in the Wall Street Journal today about the former future of the New York Mets, Fernando Martinez. One thing I wish they didn't mention is something I recall applying to both Moises Alou and Yankee catcher Jorge Posada:

"In 2009, while playing in the Dominican winter league, Martinez missed several games because of blisters on his hands. Former Met Moises Alou, the general manager of Martinez's winter ball team, told him to urinate on his hands to make the skin more resilient. 'It worked,' Martinez said."

Unfortunately he says it worked, which means we'll be hearing more about this in the future.

High-speed rail: the elegant way to travel...

The White House recently had Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood make a trip to Philadelphia's 30th Street station to announce the President's plan to have 80% of Americans access to high-speed rail within 25 years. (So we can be in 25 years what Japan is like today? At least I hope our streets will be that clean by then.)

Great pieces by the New York Times and Washington Post to report the facts of the announcement. The Wall Street Journal made sure to imply some foreign conspiracy about "Japanese-style bullet trains" and the socialist idea of how Amtrak is the "federally subsidized national railroad operator", which it may be but seems somewhat worse when you describe it in such a utilitarian way. (Of course, that probably was their intent.)

“Life is like a box of chocolates.”

In a blog post on October 6th, I said that the Republican candidates for Governor in Ohio and Wisconsin were only using the issue of high-speed rail for political posturing and really had no intent to turn away free federal money that would create construction jobs in their states.

I guess I was wrong because The New York Times now reports that California, Florida, and a handful of other states will be receiving the funding that Ohio and Wisconsin are turning away. (Update: The Wall Street Journal also reported this story on December 10th.) For those states, “Life is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get.”

As far as the newly-elected Governors of Ohio and Wisconsin are concerned, another Forrest Gump quote comes to mind:
“Stupid is as stupid does.”

Is there a reason the red line is so far north of the others?

A Wall Street Journal article today focuses on the White House initiative to boost Latino achievement in colleges. However, the report it cites states that Latino college-completion rates are depressed due to “language barriers and obstacles caused by immigration status”, which would also be the case with Asians too but the graph included in the article does not show that.

Now, in my lifetime I’ve known many people across every race, religion, and ethnic background and realized that intelligence is strictly an individual thing and nothing that can be attributed to a person’s race, background, upbringing, etc. In fact, the biggest factor I’ve seen is work ethic and it’s hard to argue that any particular group is inherently lazy or more likely to work harder and/or smarter than any other group. So what’s really happening here?

"WTF C.C.?" (No, not C.C. Sabathia, the bigger C.C.)

Short-sighted, misguided, and downright insanely ludicrous. There are no ways to even give Gov. Chris Christie the benefit of the doubt on finding other alternatives to the THE Tunnel. Though he seems like he would be a nice guy in person, the reality is he represents the 'Old' New Jersey, where the automobile was king, rather than the 'New' New Jersey that has to deal with scarce parking, high gas prices (even with the lowest gasoline tax in the country), and pothole infested roads that you don’t have to worry about while you’re listening to your iPod and reading your Kindle while riding NJ Transit.

Paul Krugman takes a more political and economic perspective but still explains it pretty straightforwardly in his column today, where he says:

“So, about that tunnel: with almost 1,200 people per square mile, New Jersey is the most densely populated state in America, more densely populated than any major European nation. {emphasis mine} Add in the fact that many residents work in New York, and you have a state that can’t function without adequate public transportation. There just isn’t enough space for everyone to drive to work.”

Is this the Military-Industrial Complex Ike warned us about 50 years ago?

A blog post at The Economist offers a counterpoint to a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece authored by AEI's Arthur Brooks, Heritage's Ed Feulner, and the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol. One key point that jumped out at me was:

"The reality is that much of the world is free-riding off the security provided by American military dominance. Were American taxpayers to refuse to bear so much of the burden of keeping the world safe for Danish container ships, other countries would surely step up. Furthermore, considerations of basic distributive fairness suggest they should."

The blog posting also cites another great column at The Washington Post by Linda J. Bilmes and Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, which breaks down the actual direct and indirect costs of the Iraq War.

WSJ.com: A Nation That Won't Be Fooled Again

In today’s Wall Street Journal, David Weidner criticizes the criticism surrounding the recent report by two highly reputable economists, Alan Blinder of Princeton University and Mark Zandi of Moody’s. My suggestion: read the report and decide for yourself rather than reading panicked analysts overreacting to its premises based on their own personal biases.

Frank: The Persecution of Sarah Palin - WSJ.com

A particularly funny line in Thomas Frank's column:

"The respect she [Palin] shows history, though, is the kind of respect you show the flag when you soak it in kerosene and touch a match to it."