Curiouser and curiouser. Greenspan uses the “R” word in Hong Kong, and the Chinese stock market goes down 9% the next day. Now the sequence of the two events might have been pure coincidence (the main cause for the Chinese sell off was the announcement that the powers that be were going to tighten margin […]
Read more...Roland Piquepaille’s Technology Trends, in his post “Super-green minivans possible today,” picks up on a Mercury News story that discusses what amounts to a low-emissions minivan, one that meets the stringent California requirements for 2016. Except this car hasn’t been built yet: According to the Mercury News, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has designed […]
Read more...We’ve noted before that the Journal’s editorial pages are not the place to go if you want reality-based commentary. This piece, “Wall Street Journal AMT Editorial,” from Linda Beale on ataxingmanner (which came to our attention via Mark Thoma’s Economist’s View) dissects a recent WSJ editorial on the alternative minimum tax, or AMT. For readers […]
Read more...So advises the Wall Street Journal, in a commentary, “Worth the Weight,” by Arthur Brooks. Now contrarian articles usually make for good reading, and presumably that was the reason the WSJ ran this piece. Oh, it’s in the Saturday edition going into the long Presidents’ Day weekend, a good time for lighter fare (no pun […]
Read more...Before we go any further with this item, in which rats in a study developed cancer from consuming genetically modified potatoes, it’s important to note that this was one study and the study was “badly flawed”. Half the rats died (which half?) and the results were based only on the survivors. But this item post-worthy […]
Read more...Wonder why the Financial Times seems to do a consistently better job of reporting on topics that are inconvenient to American executives, like institutional investors taking serious steps to rein in their compensation, that the US media outlets covering the same beat, like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and Bloomberg? This story […]
Read more...We’ve had accounting fraud, pay that seldom bears any relation to performance, and options backdating. And it appears we aren’t done yet. The next bit of CEO malfeasance that is getting a bit more press is that CEOs are working in concert with private equity firms to buy the companies they head on the cheap. […]
Read more...The Wall Street Journal’s editors have weighed in with their objections to the first of four reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued last week. And predictably, they dispute the work of 2000 scientists from 113 countries by claiming the “full scientific report” due out in May undercuts the “short policy report” issued […]
Read more...Readers may have noticed that we have a soft spot in our heart for negative news about the economy. That’s because the business and popular press dwell on the postive and give short shrift to the other side (with the exception of the Financial Times). So we have a tense geopolitical climate, global warming looking […]
Read more...The attack on the UN’s Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change, which issued its dire first of four reports on February 2 (see today’s earlier post for details) began even before the report was issued. We found this story in the Guardian, thanks to Brad DeLong’s blog, Grasping Reality with Both Hands: Scientists and economists have […]
Read more...As you doubtless know by now, on February 2, the UN issued the first of four reports due out this year by the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change. The paper, six years in the making, draws on the work of over 2000 highly respected climate scientists from 113 countries. And the conclusions are pretty unambiguous: […]
Read more...We have been hard on the Journal for its tendency to politicize news coverage and omit stories that point to systemic financial risk. So we would like to give credit to the Journal when credit is due. This morning, the Wall Street Journal had a first page story on the stock market mania in China, […]
Read more...There is a widespread belief in the US that editorializing in the Wall Street Journal is limited to the editorial page. We’ve seen in the past that this just ain’t so (see posts of January 12 and January 16). And today we have a doozy. We have a real news event, reported as the lead […]
Read more...One of the dangers of blogging is that it is easy to shoot from the hip, so I hope I am not guilty of responding in kind to a remarkably fact-devoid post from the Economist’s Free Exchange. This post, which argues that the savings of having a health care system that substitutes preventive care for […]
Read more...What is and isn’t fair reporting is very much in the eye of the beholder. However, it seems odd that a story that the Financial Times thought important enough to run on its first page has gotten no play in the US: Democrats look to boost investor rights Signs are emerging of a Democratic effort […]
Read more...