help me answer these questions

Status
Not open for further replies.

marceil

New member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Arabic
Home Country
Egypt
Current Location
United States
A Nobel Prize for Peter Diamond--October 12, 2010
It has been a big year for Peter Diamond, 70, the renowned professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In April, Mr. Diamond was nominated by President Obama to serve on the seven-member board of governors of the Federal Reserve. On Monday, he became one of three recipients of this year’s Nobel in economic science.
In between — on Aug. 5, the day the Senate adjourned for its summer recess — Republican senators used an obscure procedural rule to obstruct Mr. Diamond’s nomination to the Fed. Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee, said, at the time, that Mr. Diamond lacked sufficiently broad macroeconomic experience.
Mr. Shelby responded to Mr. Diamond’s Nobel by saying that the Royal Swedish Academy “does not determine who is qualified to serve” on the Fed board. True enough. But it’s quite a third-party endorsement.
It was absurd from the start to suggest that Mr. Diamond was unqualified. By law, the Fed’s mandate is to promote low inflation and full employment. Mr. Diamond and his fellow laureates are being recognized precisely for their groundbreaking work into the ways in which joblessness, job vacancies and wages are affected by regulation and economic policy.
The work bears directly on whether today’s unemployment is a cyclical result of recession or a structural mismatch between workers’ skills and employers’ needs. It is also relevant to supply-and-demand issues in housing, another important challenge facing the Fed as it tries to steward the weak economy.
Last month, President Obama renominated Mr. Diamond for the Fed board. It is believed that Republicans will not try to obstruct his nomination a second time. To do so would be to deprive the Fed of one of the best minds in economics.

Is the author biased in favor of Diamond's nomination?
Is the author biased against his nomination? give me two words to proof the answers
 

emsr2d2

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
A Nobel Prize for Peter Diamond--October 12, 2010
It has been a big year for Peter Diamond, 70, the renowned professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In April, Mr. Diamond was nominated by President Obama to serve on the seven-member board of governors of the Federal Reserve. On Monday, he became one of three recipients of this year’s Nobel in economic science.
In between — on Aug. 5, the day the Senate adjourned for its summer recess — Republican senators used an obscure procedural rule to obstruct Mr. Diamond’s nomination to the Fed. Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee, said, at the time, that Mr. Diamond lacked sufficiently broad macroeconomic experience.
Mr. Shelby responded to Mr. Diamond’s Nobel by saying that the Royal Swedish Academy “does not determine who is qualified to serve” on the Fed board. True enough. But it’s quite a third-party endorsement.
It was absurd from the start to suggest that Mr. Diamond was unqualified. By law, the Fed’s mandate is to promote low inflation and full employment. Mr. Diamond and his fellow laureates are being recognized precisely for their groundbreaking work into the ways in which joblessness, job vacancies and wages are affected by regulation and economic policy.
The work bears directly on whether today’s unemployment is a cyclical result of recession or a structural mismatch between workers’ skills and employers’ needs. It is also relevant to supply-and-demand issues in housing, another important challenge facing the Fed as it tries to steward the weak economy.
Last month, President Obama renominated Mr. Diamond for the Fed board. It is believed that Republicans will not try to obstruct his nomination a second time. To do so would be to deprive the Fed of one of the best minds in economics.

Is the author biased in favor of Diamond's nomination?
Is the author biased against his nomination? give me two words to proof the answers

1. This would be better posted in the "Ask a Teacher" section.
2. Even there, please remember that we don't do your work for you. You need to try to answer those questions yourself first. If you post your suggested answers, we will be happy to comment on the grammar, punctuation etc of your suggested answers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top