It is bad when the most pertinent of commentaries gets no response. What is ironic here is that at the micro level banks are telling their public stop pretending we are not extending even though they face near zero costs or in the case of the US negative costs.
You leave out an important scenario: in a zero interest rate environment, no bank is bad. This is why otherwise insolvent banks like Bank of America or Citi can stay solvent. It doesn’t matter the proportion of non-performing loans on the asset side as long as its cost of funds is minimal. Banks are thus engaged in a race with time to capture a positive return to recapitalize before interest rates rise.
Posted by: Guillaume | November 08, 2010 at 10:48 PM
Yep extend and pretend. That is the future but it is not as yet the present.
If we needed any more proof that it is not just the gun crazies among the Cons that are incapable of having an adult conversation about the registry here is
Couple of choice quotes:
There are women walking around intact today who will die at the hands of their violent husbands if the registry vanishes.
No, the NDP will be staid, cowardly and in this case retrograde. The corpses of the Montreal Massacre are silent and the yapping gun-freedom brigade is so very loud.
Wow I guess then one argument by vehemence deserves another. Thanks for raising the bar Heather.
Some months ago I wrote about what I found problematic with the dogmatic proposition that the existing long gun registry was all good. Any opposition party could have introduced a private member’s bill which amended the existing legislation in three ways:
One: Abolish registration fees. If registering long guns is a public good than it should be paid for by everyone
Two: Abolish renewal: Once registered long guns are registered for life with two caveats. When the owner moves he or she needs to notify the registry of their new address. In the event of sale the seller must notify the registry and send the contact details of the buyer. The existing legislation does not require renewal of certificates. Last time I take the say-so of the anti-registration camp. Always verify with primary sources where possible.
Three: exempt .22. One already needs a PAL to own one and registration of this hobby riffle is simply too extreme (unless of course someone can show me the violent crime stats for .22 rifles).
Condition one effectively kills the too onerous argument.
Condition two kills the tax grab argument.
Condition three demonstrates a minimal knowledge of arms.
But of course long gun registration became mothers milk and anyone talking against it was put in the Nestle camp. Maybe the opposition parties will learn how to deal with *easy* wedge issues someday, but I am not holding my breath.