Friday, July 11, 2008
Note to A-Rod: Tie Her to a Rocket
It's cheaper to keep her. Or that's what I heard. Why in the hell would A-Rod risk a marriage over Madonna? She was past her prime 10 years ago. Details on the divorce:
Cynthia Rodriguez filed for divorce in Florida, not New York where they also claim residency due to the perceived leniency of Florida law.
Cynthia's filing says she wants the couple's $12 million mansion in Coral Gables, Fla., along with alimony, her Maybach, and up to half of the more-than-$140 million A-Rod has earned during their six-year marriage. Sure that isn't MJ money, but it is definitely Paul McCarthy. At least MJ was with her for about 15 years, not 6.
Under Florida law, a prenup has to be "fair and reasonable" to be considered enforceable. Gold-Bikin said prenups she has seen in other states "that say, 'the woman gets nothing' " would not be upheld in Florida.
A-Rod has hired the same attorney that Shaq had, even though his divorce talks have cooled down.
Tie her to a Rocket reference. Fast forward to 3:50 for Big Boi.
Cynthia Rodriguez filed for divorce in Florida, not New York where they also claim residency due to the perceived leniency of Florida law.
Cynthia's filing says she wants the couple's $12 million mansion in Coral Gables, Fla., along with alimony, her Maybach, and up to half of the more-than-$140 million A-Rod has earned during their six-year marriage. Sure that isn't MJ money, but it is definitely Paul McCarthy. At least MJ was with her for about 15 years, not 6.
Under Florida law, a prenup has to be "fair and reasonable" to be considered enforceable. Gold-Bikin said prenups she has seen in other states "that say, 'the woman gets nothing' " would not be upheld in Florida.
A-Rod has hired the same attorney that Shaq had, even though his divorce talks have cooled down.
Tie her to a Rocket reference. Fast forward to 3:50 for Big Boi.
When The Man is One of Us
This is a great perspective on why Black America (particularly "the Black Caucus") may not be ready for a Black President. Check out theroot.com more often for some great insight into culture, politics, and news.
By Jack White | TheRoot.com
Sure, Jesse is an old fool who doesn't know how to act. But his latest gaffe shows how none of us is really ready for this moment.
July 10, 2008--On one level, it is easy to dismiss the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.'s crudely worded metaphorical threat to castrate Barack Obama for supposedly talking down to black people as the raving of an increasingly irrelevant, former big shot suffused with resentment at the rising star who pushed him off stage.
That, after all, is the sort of talk we'd expect from a lynch mob, not a civil rights leader who does not seem to realize that the times have passed him by. Even his son and namesake, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., agrees that his dad is doing more harm these days than good. Pronouncing himself outraged and disappointed by his father's ugly words about Obama, Jackson Jr. issued a statement that, in effect, ordered dear old dad to "keep hope alive" and shut up.
That's good advice, and one can only hope that Jackson Sr. accepts it. But in a deeper sense, his stunningly inappropriate comments symbolize the social, political and psychological vertigo that all of us, and especially black Americans, are experiencing because of Obama's success. We are all, including Obama, in a place we never really thought we would be, and it has knocked us off our feet. We don't know how to act. We don't have a plan. We're searching for our equilibrium. And until we regain our footing, we can expect all sorts of bizarre behavior from people who ought to know better. Hold on to your hat.
We haven't really been in a place this confusing since 1954, when the NAACP's crusade against segregation culminated in the Brown vs. Board decision and the walls came tumbling down. It's fair to say that we were so focused on winning that fight that we weren't prepared for the victory or its aftermath. We've spent nearly 60 years since then trying to figure out what kind of relationship we want to have with America and with each other. For the most part, we, like Jackson Sr., have seen ourselves as outsiders battling for justice and a seat at the table. Our default has been to protest. And while that mindset has served us well, it has, in a flash, been made damn near obsolete by the prospect, even the likelihood, that one of us may soon become the most powerful man in the world. If that happens, how can we seriously argue that we're being held back by anything but the limits we place on ourselves?
That, it seems to me, accounts in part for the frustration some of us are feeling by what we interpret as Obama's move to the center. We are simply not accustomed to one of our own playing real, power politics. Some of us see his call for an expansion of George Bush's half-hearted commitment to faith-based social programs as mere politics, what Jackson Sr. castigated as "talking down to black people." We explain Obama's support for the compromise Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Supreme Court's upholding of a citizen's right to bear arms as attempts to inoculate himself against Republican attacks.
And, of course, they are.
But they, like Obama's Father's Day speech urging black men to take more responsibility for their children, are more than political posturing. They represent the first stirrings of a new consensus that places more emphasis on a public discussion of personal responsibility than on protest, on publicly delving into our own shortcomings and dysfunctional behavior.
There's nothing new about this kind of self-examination, but in the past we've conducted it mainly in private, in barbershops and beauty parlors, and churches. We've bristled when whites in power like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, joined in the critique of, for example, our soaring rate of out-of-wedlock births. We've moaned about the negative consequences of washing dirty laundry in public. But such a self-protective mindset no longer makes sense because Obama is one of us, who has taken part in our private handwringing about the self-inflicted wounds that bedevil segments of the black community. He hasn't said anything most of us haven't heard or said at the dinner table. But now, because Obama is who he is, the whole world is listening in to the conversation.
The attention makes us uncomfortable and disoriented. So does the prospect that one of us might soon be in charge of trying to fix this mess instead of simply complaining about it.
We're not really ready for the day when The Man becomes a black man.
It's a dizzying idea that is going to take some getting used to. And until we do, we'll stumble about, like Jesse Jackson Sr., saying all kinds of crazy things as we slip and slide on the new paradigm.
Jack White is a former columnist with TIME magazine.
By Jack White | TheRoot.com
Sure, Jesse is an old fool who doesn't know how to act. But his latest gaffe shows how none of us is really ready for this moment.
July 10, 2008--On one level, it is easy to dismiss the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.'s crudely worded metaphorical threat to castrate Barack Obama for supposedly talking down to black people as the raving of an increasingly irrelevant, former big shot suffused with resentment at the rising star who pushed him off stage.
That, after all, is the sort of talk we'd expect from a lynch mob, not a civil rights leader who does not seem to realize that the times have passed him by. Even his son and namesake, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., agrees that his dad is doing more harm these days than good. Pronouncing himself outraged and disappointed by his father's ugly words about Obama, Jackson Jr. issued a statement that, in effect, ordered dear old dad to "keep hope alive" and shut up.
That's good advice, and one can only hope that Jackson Sr. accepts it. But in a deeper sense, his stunningly inappropriate comments symbolize the social, political and psychological vertigo that all of us, and especially black Americans, are experiencing because of Obama's success. We are all, including Obama, in a place we never really thought we would be, and it has knocked us off our feet. We don't know how to act. We don't have a plan. We're searching for our equilibrium. And until we regain our footing, we can expect all sorts of bizarre behavior from people who ought to know better. Hold on to your hat.
We haven't really been in a place this confusing since 1954, when the NAACP's crusade against segregation culminated in the Brown vs. Board decision and the walls came tumbling down. It's fair to say that we were so focused on winning that fight that we weren't prepared for the victory or its aftermath. We've spent nearly 60 years since then trying to figure out what kind of relationship we want to have with America and with each other. For the most part, we, like Jackson Sr., have seen ourselves as outsiders battling for justice and a seat at the table. Our default has been to protest. And while that mindset has served us well, it has, in a flash, been made damn near obsolete by the prospect, even the likelihood, that one of us may soon become the most powerful man in the world. If that happens, how can we seriously argue that we're being held back by anything but the limits we place on ourselves?
That, it seems to me, accounts in part for the frustration some of us are feeling by what we interpret as Obama's move to the center. We are simply not accustomed to one of our own playing real, power politics. Some of us see his call for an expansion of George Bush's half-hearted commitment to faith-based social programs as mere politics, what Jackson Sr. castigated as "talking down to black people." We explain Obama's support for the compromise Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Supreme Court's upholding of a citizen's right to bear arms as attempts to inoculate himself against Republican attacks.
And, of course, they are.
But they, like Obama's Father's Day speech urging black men to take more responsibility for their children, are more than political posturing. They represent the first stirrings of a new consensus that places more emphasis on a public discussion of personal responsibility than on protest, on publicly delving into our own shortcomings and dysfunctional behavior.
There's nothing new about this kind of self-examination, but in the past we've conducted it mainly in private, in barbershops and beauty parlors, and churches. We've bristled when whites in power like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, joined in the critique of, for example, our soaring rate of out-of-wedlock births. We've moaned about the negative consequences of washing dirty laundry in public. But such a self-protective mindset no longer makes sense because Obama is one of us, who has taken part in our private handwringing about the self-inflicted wounds that bedevil segments of the black community. He hasn't said anything most of us haven't heard or said at the dinner table. But now, because Obama is who he is, the whole world is listening in to the conversation.
The attention makes us uncomfortable and disoriented. So does the prospect that one of us might soon be in charge of trying to fix this mess instead of simply complaining about it.
We're not really ready for the day when The Man becomes a black man.
It's a dizzying idea that is going to take some getting used to. And until we do, we'll stumble about, like Jesse Jackson Sr., saying all kinds of crazy things as we slip and slide on the new paradigm.
Jack White is a former columnist with TIME magazine.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Beat Back Pain for Free
Highlight:
Go to doctor, then specialist, then get cortizone shot, and treatment right?
Orthopedic surgeon and back expert Mark Brown says not to do any of the above. Instead: Get a sound diagnosis and then take a walk.
From Dr. Brown's perspective, the best things you can do when you know what is causing back pain are to give up smoking, lose weight and walk, or participate in some kind of aerobic exercise, such as walking on a treadmill or swimming.
Go to doctor, then specialist, then get cortizone shot, and treatment right?
Orthopedic surgeon and back expert Mark Brown says not to do any of the above. Instead: Get a sound diagnosis and then take a walk.
From Dr. Brown's perspective, the best things you can do when you know what is causing back pain are to give up smoking, lose weight and walk, or participate in some kind of aerobic exercise, such as walking on a treadmill or swimming.
US foreclosure filings surge 53 percent in June
Highlights from article:
1) 252,363 homes received at least one foreclosure-related notice in June, up 53 percent from the same month last year, but down 3 percent from May
2) One in every 501 U.S. households received a foreclosure filing last month
3) In Nevada, one in every 122 households received a foreclosure-related notice last month, more than four times the national rate
4) Economists project 2.5 million homes nationwide will enter the foreclosure process this year, up from about 1.5 million in 2007
5) Bush administration announced Tuesday that it would be ready on Monday to implement an FHA expansion that lets borrowers who've fallen behind on their home payments -- because of mortgage rate resets or other economic hardships -- get more affordable loans
1) 252,363 homes received at least one foreclosure-related notice in June, up 53 percent from the same month last year, but down 3 percent from May
2) One in every 501 U.S. households received a foreclosure filing last month
3) In Nevada, one in every 122 households received a foreclosure-related notice last month, more than four times the national rate
4) Economists project 2.5 million homes nationwide will enter the foreclosure process this year, up from about 1.5 million in 2007
5) Bush administration announced Tuesday that it would be ready on Monday to implement an FHA expansion that lets borrowers who've fallen behind on their home payments -- because of mortgage rate resets or other economic hardships -- get more affordable loans
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Is the NBA One Year Rule in Question?
Lawyer says Arizona signee Jennings heading for Europe
Arizona signee Brandon Jennings has decided to make an unprecedented move to forgo playing in college and instead pursue a professional career in Europe next season before likely entering the 2009 NBA draft, Jenning's attorney, Jeff Valle, told ESPN.com on Tuesday night.
"Over the course of the last two months I have consulted a number of people in basketball before coming to this decision," Jennings said in a statement released through Valle. "I would like to thank the University of Arizona for their interest and support through this process."
Jennings, a Los Angeles native who played his final two high school seasons at Oak Hill Academy in Mouth of Wilson, Va., was rated as the nation's top point guard in the class of 2008, according to ESPN.com.
Valle said Jennings will not even wait for his third standardized test result to see if he got a qualifying score after his second test was questioned by the NCAA. The results from the third test are due later this week.
"That's a moot point now," Valle said. "He's not going to the University of Arizona. Brandon plans on going to Europe."
Valle said a number of European teams have expressed an interest in signing Jennings for next season. Valle declined to say which teams and in which countries.
Valle said that the family will consult with Sonny Vaccaro and likely sign with an agent to help facilitate a contract with a European professional team. Vaccaro is considered the godfather of grassroots basketball, having worked for all three major sneaker companies -- Nike, adidas and Reebok -- who sponsor high school summer basketball events.
Jennings was expected to be the starting point guard for Arizona after Jerryd Bayless left for the NBA draft. The Wildcats also return Chase Budinger after he withdrew from the draft as well as Hall of Fame coach Lute Olson after he took a leave of absence last season.
"We're disappointed in terms of Brandon's decision, but we want to wish him the best of luck," Olson said in a statement. "We hope that things turn out well for him in the future."
Under an NBA draft rule put in place two years ago, Jennings has to be out of high school at least one calendar year and be 19 years old before being eligible for the NBA draft.
NBA Free Agents: As of July 9
The Already Signed List
Gilbert "I Get Buckets" Arenas - Wizards - 6yrs $111 mill
Elton Brand - Philly - 5yrs $82 mill
Corey Maggette - Golden St - 5yrs $50 mill
Baron "Fear the Beard" Davis - 5yrs $65 mill
Beno Udrih (Yes, Beno Udrih) - 5yrs $33.5
Mickael Pietris - Multi year deal at mid level exception - $5.5 mill/yr
The Hot Short List
James "The New Horry" Posey
The Not Going Anywhere List
Andre Igoudala - With the signing of Brand, this team has a legitimate shot of making some noise in the playoffs. Not really, but they are a playoff team nonetheless. With the right draw and they are in the East, they can make it to the second round. The team still lacks outside shooting, cough, Kyle Korver.
Josh Smith - With the signing of Brand, all of the cap room for Smith just went out of the window. His bargaining chips now fall to the Clippers and some sign and trade options with Memphis and possibly the Bulls for Deng/Gordon.
Emeka Okafor - In the last year of his contract but is injury prone and still not an offensive threat. He is becoming his generations' Ben Wallace.
Monta Ellis - With Baron gone, it's his team to run and his time to shine. Can he prove that he is a point guard or will Stephen "Right Hook" Jackson play some point forward.
Gilbert "I Get Buckets" Arenas - Wizards - 6yrs $111 mill
Elton Brand - Philly - 5yrs $82 mill
Corey Maggette - Golden St - 5yrs $50 mill
Baron "Fear the Beard" Davis - 5yrs $65 mill
Beno Udrih (Yes, Beno Udrih) - 5yrs $33.5
Mickael Pietris - Multi year deal at mid level exception - $5.5 mill/yr
The Hot Short List
James "The New Horry" Posey
The Not Going Anywhere List
Andre Igoudala - With the signing of Brand, this team has a legitimate shot of making some noise in the playoffs. Not really, but they are a playoff team nonetheless. With the right draw and they are in the East, they can make it to the second round. The team still lacks outside shooting, cough, Kyle Korver.
Josh Smith - With the signing of Brand, all of the cap room for Smith just went out of the window. His bargaining chips now fall to the Clippers and some sign and trade options with Memphis and possibly the Bulls for Deng/Gordon.
Emeka Okafor - In the last year of his contract but is injury prone and still not an offensive threat. He is becoming his generations' Ben Wallace.
Monta Ellis - With Baron gone, it's his team to run and his time to shine. Can he prove that he is a point guard or will Stephen "Right Hook" Jackson play some point forward.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
How Much Does It Cost You in Wages if You “Sound Black?”
Fascinating new research by my University of Chicago colleague, Jeffrey Grogger, compares the wages of people who “sound black” when they talk to those who do not.
His main finding: blacks who “sound black” earn salaries that are 10 percent lower than blacks who do not “sound black,” even after controlling for measures of intelligence, experience in the work force, and other factors that influence how much people earn. (For what it is worth, whites who “sound black” earn 6 percent lower than other whites.)
How does Grogger know who “sounds black?” As part of a large longitudinal study called the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, follow-up validation interviews were conducted over the phone and recorded.
Grogger was able to take these phone interviews, purge them of any identifying information, and then ask people to try to identify the voices as to whether the speaker was black or white. The listeners were pretty good at distinguishing race through voices: 98 percent of the time they got the gender of the speaker right, 84 percent of white speakers were correctly identified as white, and 77 percent of black speakers were correctly identified as black.
Grogger asked multiple listeners to rate each voice and assigned the voice either to a distinctly white or black category (if the listeners all tended to agree on the race), or an indistinct category if there was disagreement.
Then he put this measure of whether a voice sounded black into a regression (the standard statistical tool that economists use for estimating things), and came up with the finding that blacks who “sound black” earn almost 10 percent less, even after taking into account other factors that could influence earnings. One piece of interesting good news is that blacks who do not “sound black” earn essentially the same as whites.
(It turns out you don’t want to sound southern, either. Although pretty imprecisely estimated, it is almost as bad for your wages to sound southern as it is to sound black, even controlling for whether you live in the south.)
So what does this all mean?
The first question to ask is whether the impact of speech on wages is a causal one. It is possible that there are many other characteristics that differ between blacks who do or do not “sound black” that Grogger cannot control for in his regressions. It does seem likely that the biases at work would make his estimate an upper bound. (Although it should also be noted that his estimates are for young people, and the importance of speech may become important with age, in which case his results might underestimate the long-run effects.)
If one believes Grogger’s effects are causal, then investing in the ability to not “sound black” looks to have a huge return — roughly of the same magnitude as getting one more year of schooling.
Of course, there is the issue of one’s identity. There may be personal costs associated with being black and not sounding black. But these costs would have to be pretty large. (When I have Asian Ph.D. students go on the job market in the United States, I tell them that I think there is rampant discrimination against non-English speakers and encourage them to adopt Americanized first names for the job market. Very few of my students choose to do so — either a testimony to the identity cost of pretending to be someone you aren’t, or possibly their lack of faith in my assessment of the amount of discrimination.)
I was talking with one of my colleagues about this study. He thinks it will be a very important and influential one.
My response, “Tru dat.”
His main finding: blacks who “sound black” earn salaries that are 10 percent lower than blacks who do not “sound black,” even after controlling for measures of intelligence, experience in the work force, and other factors that influence how much people earn. (For what it is worth, whites who “sound black” earn 6 percent lower than other whites.)
How does Grogger know who “sounds black?” As part of a large longitudinal study called the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, follow-up validation interviews were conducted over the phone and recorded.
Grogger was able to take these phone interviews, purge them of any identifying information, and then ask people to try to identify the voices as to whether the speaker was black or white. The listeners were pretty good at distinguishing race through voices: 98 percent of the time they got the gender of the speaker right, 84 percent of white speakers were correctly identified as white, and 77 percent of black speakers were correctly identified as black.
Grogger asked multiple listeners to rate each voice and assigned the voice either to a distinctly white or black category (if the listeners all tended to agree on the race), or an indistinct category if there was disagreement.
Then he put this measure of whether a voice sounded black into a regression (the standard statistical tool that economists use for estimating things), and came up with the finding that blacks who “sound black” earn almost 10 percent less, even after taking into account other factors that could influence earnings. One piece of interesting good news is that blacks who do not “sound black” earn essentially the same as whites.
(It turns out you don’t want to sound southern, either. Although pretty imprecisely estimated, it is almost as bad for your wages to sound southern as it is to sound black, even controlling for whether you live in the south.)
So what does this all mean?
The first question to ask is whether the impact of speech on wages is a causal one. It is possible that there are many other characteristics that differ between blacks who do or do not “sound black” that Grogger cannot control for in his regressions. It does seem likely that the biases at work would make his estimate an upper bound. (Although it should also be noted that his estimates are for young people, and the importance of speech may become important with age, in which case his results might underestimate the long-run effects.)
If one believes Grogger’s effects are causal, then investing in the ability to not “sound black” looks to have a huge return — roughly of the same magnitude as getting one more year of schooling.
Of course, there is the issue of one’s identity. There may be personal costs associated with being black and not sounding black. But these costs would have to be pretty large. (When I have Asian Ph.D. students go on the job market in the United States, I tell them that I think there is rampant discrimination against non-English speakers and encourage them to adopt Americanized first names for the job market. Very few of my students choose to do so — either a testimony to the identity cost of pretending to be someone you aren’t, or possibly their lack of faith in my assessment of the amount of discrimination.)
I was talking with one of my colleagues about this study. He thinks it will be a very important and influential one.
My response, “Tru dat.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)