Sentences with phrase «equity argument made»

In addition to that political advantage, this equity argument made vouchers seem part of school reform.

Not exact matches

A strong argument could be made that the stock market has changed to such a degree that equity prices are operating on a new plateau.

In fact, a strong argument could be made that today's equity market is the most overextended in the history of the New York Stock Exchange.

Yet an argument can be made that what the Fed was really worried about is not the level of equity prices, but their volatility.

We believe equities outside the United States look exceedingly attractive in the current environment relative to US stocks.2 The argument for non-US stocks today in many ways resembles the case for value stocks that we've been making over the past 18 months.

The equity issue, then, seems to matter a great deal to disadvantaged parents, and they appear to connect it to private - school choice in a way that is entirely consistent with the argument voucher advocates have been making for the past decade: that choice is a way of promoting social equity.

The report made a compelling argument to introduce a «base rate» level of funding per student, known as the Schooling Resource Standard (SRS), with extra loadings on top based on a number of equity categories.

They address some of the self - justificatory blather («it's the most hated bull market in history,» to which they reply that sales of leveraged bull market funds and equity exposure by market - timing newsletters were at records for 2014 and much of 2015 which some might think of as showin» some lovin»), then make two arguments:

I could make an argument that AAPL will see multiple expansion in 2012 if the market goes up (on simple allocation math), and will see multiple compression in 2012 if the market goes down (again, as allocation dollars move away from equities, dollars will leave AAPL too, helping to support the super bearish argument on the stock).

In his book, Active Value Investing, Vitaliy Katsenelson makes a compelling argument that equity markets are now trapped in a range - bound market that he estimates will last until 2020 or so.

but, many of your arguments are deeply flawed: That equities have made good returns since 1926 is pointless for a number of reasons: Firstly, most people do not have 85 years or an arbitrarily long period of time to save up for retirement.

In summary, a strong case can be made that the US emissions reduction commitment for 2025 of 26 % to 28 % clearly fails to pass minimum ethical scrutiny when one considers: (a) the 2007 IPCC report on which the US likely relied upon to establish a 80 % reduction target by 2050 also called for 25 % to 40 % reduction by developed countries by 2020, and (b) although reasonable people may disagree with what «equity» means under the UNFCCC, the US commitments can't be reconciled with any reasonable interpretation of what «equity» requires, (c) the United States has expressly acknowledged that its commitments are based upon what can be achieved under existing US law not on what is required of it as a mater of justice, (d) it is clear that more ambitious US commitments have been blocked by arguments that alleged unacceptable costs to the US economy, arguments which have ignored US responsibilities to those most vulnerable to climate change, and (e) it is virtually certain that the US commitments can not be construed to be a fair allocation of the remaining carbon budget that is available for the entire world to limit warming to 2 °C.

And so although it may not be possible to say precisely what equity requires of nations in advance, strong arguments can be made that some national commitments fail to satisfy reasonable interpretations of what equity requires.

Although a strong case can be made that historical ghg emissions before 1990 should be considered in determining a nation's fair share of safe global emissions, selecting a common baseline year such as 1990 would facilitate easier citizen comparison of national commitments while retaining the rights of nations to make arguments that historical ghg emissions should be considered in any equity framework.