The Kids (Aren't) Alright - World Happiness Report

[956 Worldwide 34313]

9 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Last I checked taxes for schools were based on property taxes not income taxes... but wouldn't it also be nice if people earned a good wage?  Which would not only provide them with better living conditions, but also provide the government with more tax revenue from the higher wages?

Maybe while we are debating the direct transfer of assets from one class to another class, we could also debate different funding mechanisms for schools? Maybe we can talk about a wealth tax? 
 

CEO pay is outrageous but it’s way down the list of what needs to be done here— the problem is the singleminded pursuit of quarterly returns and shareholder value as opposed to long-term health and viability of companies where workforce is a stakeholder as well. Implementing some sort of upper income cap doesn’t fix that. 

[Nivek 16807]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

My only point is that the right or ability to pass down wealth or property has been at best conditional throughout most of history.

The unfettered right to devise wealth or property is a relatively recent development, although it has attained almost "human right" status in that it seems to be a feature of most post-medieval societies that are regarded as advanced (whether they actually are or not).

So, maybe it shouldn't be regarded as something sacrosanct.

Nevertheless, as Captainant elucidated, it may be better to tax/confiscate that wealth before it accumulates to better keep the assets productive for anyone except the owner.

[Nivek 16807]

Just came back from my kids baseball game.   It had me thinking about what I have observed in games and from parents/coaches over the years.  Faking kids ages, gaming the team drafts, poor sportsmanship (refusing to sub when up 20-2 in a t-ball game) and parents getting a little psycho.   I wonder if this isn't just a sports issue, but if some people are hypercompetitive and stressing the shit out of their kids not just on the field but off.  

[F250 28659]

7 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Just came back from my kids baseball game.   It had me thinking about what I have observed in games and from parents/coaches over the years.  Faking kids ages, gaming the team drafts, poor sportsmanship (refusing to sub when up 20-2 in a t-ball game) and parents getting a little psycho.   I wonder if this isn't just a sports issue, but if some people are hypercompetitive and stressing the shit out of their kids not just on the field but off.  

This is standard behavior. Watch The Bad News Bears movie and the shitty adult behavior we see today was present in that movie nearly 50 years ago.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

the problem is the singleminded pursuit of quarterly returns and shareholder value as opposed to long-term health and viability of companies where workforce is a stakeholder as well.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 hours ago, Nivek said:

Edited May 12 by Biff Tannen

[Iceman 2628]

8 hours ago, F250 said:

This is standard behavior. Watch The Bad News Bears movie and the shitty adult behavior we see today was present in that movie nearly 50 years ago.

This thread makes me think of another old movie.  A good majority of the posters sound like they watched  Oliver Stone's Wall Street, yet act as if these concepts and class warfare just happened recently.  It was released in 1987.

Nobody has a shot, except those who do.  It's fucking weird.

[Captainant 27309]

18 minutes ago, Iceman said:

This thread makes me think of another old movie.  A good majority of the posters sound like they watched  Oliver Stone's Wall Street, yet act as if these concepts and class warfare just happened recently.  It was released in 1987.

Nobody has a shot, except those who do.  It's fucking weird.

More to the point, I think that flavor of capitalism is what inevitably leads to our current state of being that's being discussed. We're more than four decades down that road of decoupling company market value from the actual value that it produces, and we are still suffering the Jack Welch flavor of "shareholder first" business models. The end result is that if you're a wage earner, keeping your job and career stability is more a function of the arbitrary market than it is the actual work you've done. 

Hell, last year Google had it's most profitable quarter EVER and paid out it's first dividend while buying back $70,000,000,000 of shares. They were incredibly profitable and did extremely well - their workers should have some breathing room, right? WRONG! 12,000 layoffs sucka, BYAHH!

There's no reason for that sort of avarice and class warfare to inflict pain on their wage earners just to move the line up a tick next quarter for their investors. It's downright abusive 

Edited May 12 by Captainant

[Iceman 2628]

The google comment is perfect.  Mean, bad google* had lay offs, but  how many folks left google on their own accord?  Was google's hiring at zero?

How dare they target inefficiencies within their organization.  Those folks are entitled to lifetime employment by your rationale.

We both know that notion is asinine and ludicrous.

[Iceman 2628]

I'd still posit that redefining/ absolute destruction of the family is the key to unhappiness in our society.

Namely, fathers and raising their children. Then add in the lackadaisical parenting/ bullshit accountability at all levels of the household.

Let's blame CEOs though.  There's accountability we can control at the grass roots level in those grievances right?

The crying/bitching/moaning is easier than putting in the work- and that has zero to do with the workplace.

[Captainant 27309]

31 minutes ago, Iceman said:

The google comment is perfect.  Mean, bad google* had lay offs, but  how many folks left google on their own accord?  Was google's hiring at zero?

How dare they target inefficiencies within their organization.  Those folks are entitled to lifetime employment by your rationale.

We both know that notion is asinine and ludicrous.

You are both misrepresenting and overstating what I'm saying. Nobody is entitled to lifetime employment, but if you do good work under poor management why do the workers get cut and the management gets a bonus?

Big companies don't target inefficiencies - they tend to focus on IC's and not the short sighted decision making that's typically driven by their BOD from the investors. 

34 minutes ago, Iceman said:

I'd still posit that redefining/ absolute destruction of the family is the key to unhappiness in our society.

Namely, fathers and raising their children. Then add in the lackadaisical parenting/ bullshit accountability at all levels of the household.

It's crazy how you don't see the two are connected. Parents have more expectations on them from employers than ever, and it's not uncommon for one or both parents to be working more than one job just to make ends meet. 

There's no more stability in employment anymore. That is largely driven by the pathological need to post indefinite quarterly growth driving worker layoffs and conversion into contract employees. 

 

And it's not like I'm trying to write policy here. I'm discussing why the kids be unhappy, yo. Weird of you to aggressively move the goalposts when employer fuckery comes up

[Neonmoon 38127]

12 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

the problem is the singleminded pursuit of quarterly returns and shareholder value as opposed to long-term health and viability of companies where workforce is a stakeholder as well. Implementing some sort of upper income cap doesn’t fix that. 

Milton Friedman single handedly ruined the business model with shareholder theory. He sucks, his monetarist theory sucks, and anyone pushing his bullshit sucks. 

[immamac 42492]

1 hour ago, Iceman said:

I'd still posit that redefining/ absolute destruction of the family is the key to unhappiness in our society.

Namely, fathers and raising their children. Then add in the lackadaisical parenting/ bullshit accountability at all levels of the household.

Let's blame CEOs though.  There's accountability we can control at the grass roots level in those grievances right?

The crying/bitching/moaning is easier than putting in the work- and that has zero to do with the workplace.

Dude they just laid off core team stuff. Like the people who work in python etc. they aren’t cutting dead weight new hire morons from over hiring. They are cutting off primary function funding and doing share buybacks. 

1 hour ago, Iceman said:

I'd still posit that redefining/ absolute destruction of the family is the key to unhappiness in our society.

Namely, fathers and raising their children. Then add in the lackadaisical parenting/ bullshit accountability at all levels of the household.

Let's blame CEOs though.  There's accountability we can control at the grass roots level in those grievances right?

The crying/bitching/moaning is easier than putting in the work- and that has zero to do with the workplace.

Dude they just laid off core team stuff. Like the people who work in python etc. they aren’t cutting dead weight new hire morons from over hiring. They are cutting off primary function funding and doing share buybacks. 

On top of this they have not given raises or compensation adjustments for killer performance for the teams that did an excellent job. 

[Nivek 16807]

14 hours ago, F250 said:

This is standard behavior. Watch The Bad News Bears movie and the shitty adult behavior we see today was present in that movie nearly 50 years ago.

I suppose.    We were at one neighborhood rec league and it was really bad and then moved to a different league and it really seemed like most people were in it for the right reasons.   This season, it seems nearly half of the teams I watched were infected with absurd parent/coaches.   Seeing bad form in batters wasn't really addressed.   Far too much focus on results than skill building and the best part was most of the kids didn't really give a fuck if they won or lost, year after year, I see the same thing.   Am I wrong to think different sports will have different crowds?  

[DixonHur 11074]

4 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Milton Friedman single handedly ruined the business model with shareholder theory. He sucks, his monetarist theory sucks, and anyone pushing his bullshit sucks. 

Probably totally unrelated, and totally coincidentally (sarcasm for those who have their meters turned off)...average CEO pay has increased about 1,400% since he put forth this theory.

The Two Decades That Created Our World’s First Mass Middle Class - Inequality.org

Quote

Back in 1982, in the early stages of that redistribution, Forbes began publishing an annual compilation of the nation’s 400 grandest private fortunes. The initial Forbes 400 list included just 13 billionaires. Their combined wealth: $92 billion. Over the next four decades, Forbes notes, the combined net worth of America’s richest 400 would rise to “a staggering $4.5 trillion — making them nearly 50 times better off than their 1982 counterparts, far outpacing the consumer price index’s near tripling.”

This is within most of our lifetimes, but...

[F250 28659]

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

I suppose.    We were at one neighborhood rec league and it was really bad and then moved to a different league and it really seemed like most people were in it for the right reasons.   This season, it seems nearly half of the teams I watched were infected with absurd parent/coaches.   Seeing bad form in batters wasn't really addressed.   Far too much focus on results than skill building and the best part was most of the kids didn't really give a fuck if they won or lost, year after year, I see the same thing.   Am I wrong to think different sports will have different crowds?  

It's been my experience that it's the youth leagues/orgs that have different crowds and not the sport regarding team sports. I've seen the range of apathy to hypercompetitiveness across youth baseball, football, basketball depending on the league/org.

Individual sports tend to be really good about development but lean towards hypercompetitiveness.

[DaysOff 7821]

Goddamn this place is better with a Slorch 'Pull yourself up by your bootstraps take.'

[F250 28659]

10 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

Goddamn this place is better with a Slorch 'Pull yourself up by your bootstraps take.'

[DixonHur 11074]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

It's been my experience that it's the youth leagues/orgs that have different crowds and not the sport regarding team sports. I've seen the range of apathy to hypercompetitiveness across youth baseball, football, basketball depending on the league/org.

Individual sports tend to be really good about development but lean towards hypercompetitiveness.

Maybe we need to return to the 70's and 80's when parents didn't give a shit.  I remember my games being sparsely attended by parents.  Usually, they rotated who HAD to take us to the games and we'd all pile into the back of one of their station wagons.  From 6th grade through HS I think my parents attended about a dozen or so of my games.

Some parents went to all their kid's games, but they usually were the ones who took it way too seriously and their kids hated having them there.

[F250 28659]

2 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Maybe we need to return to the 70's and 80's when parents didn't give a shit.  I remember my games being sparsely attended by parents.  Usually, they rotated who HAD to take us to the games and we'd all pile into the back of one of their station wagons.  From 6th grade through HS I think my parents attended about a dozen or so of my games.

Some parents went to all their kid's games, but they usually were the ones who took it way too seriously and their kids hated having them there.

Yeah, youth games were not heavily attended by parents back in the 80s.

I remember going to my oldest son's first school football game when he was a 7th grader. In my mind, I was expecting it to be like my middle school football games. I was expecting about a dozen dads standing around and maybe a handful of students.

I was wrong. I walked into a mini-stadium that was at capacity. There was an announcer, cheerleaders, band music and a half-time show for 7th grade football, which is the oddest level of football.

[BabaYaga 15202]

Texas middle and high school football - it's kind of a big deal.  Film at eleven.  

[SydneyCarton 47809]

On 5/10/2024 at 8:12 PM, DixonHur said:

LO-fucking L...you just joined on Wednesday.

As another poster pointed out, it's GRUHorn, dude. 

[Don Johnson 4744]

On 5/11/2024 at 4:21 PM, DixonHur said:

Here are the issues I have with this view...mind you, I respect your right to have it, I just don't agree.

You say you want to raise the floor, not correct ratios.  Ok, how?  You can't raise the floor without money and that money is tied up in the hands of the elite...and outside a relatively few generous billionaires planning to donate after death, they've shown zero signs of giving up that wealth to help raise the floor.

The Top 1% hold 30% or America's wealth...the Top 10% gets you to nearly 70%....whereas the bottom 50% hold just 2.5% of the wealth.  That means the Top 10% hold $92 Trillion in assets, while the bottom 50% have about $3.4 Trillion.  And it's not getting better (see image below spoilered due to ssize)

In other words, if you took just 10% of the assets of the Top 10%, leaving them with a paltry $83 Trillion, and redistributed it to the bottom 50% you would almost quadruple their wealth.  Isn't that you're stated goal?  To raise the basement?

If you see another way to accomplish your goal, I'm all ears, please enlighten me.

This is not "jealousy"...I, like most here, live a comfortable life.  It's an exercise of human value and the promotion of meritocracy.  

  Reveal hidden contents

Visualizing Wealth Distribution in America (1990-2023) (visualcapitalist.com)

Is this is a one time re-distribution?  Cut a a $54,000 check to 165 million people?

[DixonHur 11074]

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

As another poster pointed out, it's GRUHorn, dude. 

Man does that explain things

[DixonHur 11074]

3 minutes ago, Don Johnson said:

Is this is a one time re-distribution?  Cut a a $54,000 check to 165 million people?

Nope.  It would be going forward...I don't believe in going backwards to correct mistakes of the past.  

So, CEO pay gets slashed and the median income goes up.  The rich are still rich, just not grotesquely so...and the lower-level employees get to keep more of the money made from their toils.

Take McDonalds for example...the CEO makes about $20m per year on average.  Last year it was $19.2m...or $9,231/hour (using the standard 2,080 hours per year)...the average McDonalds "crew member", in Austin, makes $14/hour.  

I just don't think that's right.  Should he make more than a someone working a register or making fries?  Of course, he is more highly educated, has more responsibility, etc... but 660x more?  He makes more in 3 hours than these people make in a year...that should anger everyone.

That and no heir can receive more than, say, $10 million, aside from a surviving spouse.  This still puts the heir in the Top 1% in the US, and for those of us with less than $10 million in net worth there is zero change to the current inheritance rules.

But it promotes more equality of opportunity and slows the current trend toward aristocracy.

[Don Johnson 4744]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Nope.  It would be going forward...I don't believe in going backwards to correct mistakes of the past.  

 

I'm referring to your stated goal of taking 10% of the assets from the top 10% and redistributing to the bottom 50%.  Do you plan on taking 10% of their assets once or every year?

[DixonHur 11074]

44 minutes ago, Don Johnson said:

I'm referring to your stated goal of taking 10% of the assets from the top 10% and redistributing to the bottom 50%.  Do you plan on taking 10% of their assets once or every year?

Oh.  That wasn't my "stated goal", I was responding to his stated goal of raising the floor...I was just using 10% for illustrative purposes.  It was meant to put into perspective just how much wealth is held by the top.

And I mean "held", in the literal sense...that shit ain't trickling down.

Edited May 13 by DixonHur

[Brisketexan 104462]

On 5/11/2024 at 3:29 PM, DixonHur said:

but I think things like golden toilets, 50-carat diamond rings, a fleet of private jets, 400 ft yachts, a warehouse full of classic cars, etc. is a sign of something more sinister.  It's wasteful, and basically a fuck you to the rest of the world. 

I don't disagree, but that's my personal morality.  While, yes, how one consumes has external effects, by and large, one's personal "sins" don't affect me.  If he wants to use his money to produce and watch endless chimpanzee porn, I find that twisted and sick, but as long as no chimps are harmed in the making of "Naughty Bedtime for Bonzo," I really don't care.

If I had Elon money, I'd be much more focused on doing actual good with it - if I had absolute "fuck you" money, my main splurges would be private aircraft/first-class travel everywhere (probably first-class, it's more environmentally friendly to fly with others), nice hotels, nice meals, fishing charters, etc.  I'm not a big car guy.  I think that ostentatious displays of wealth are just that.  But that's me.  If you've always dreamed of shitting in a solid gold toilet, I'm not gonna squash your dream.

Capitalism per se isn't bad, it can be quite good.

Driving per se isn't bad, it can be quite good.

Unfettered, unregulated driving with zero concern for and utter contempt of everyone else out there is bad.  If you construct a giant bro-dozer and just run everyone else over, and go 100 mph through school zones, that's bad.  We need rules and regulations to keep any good thing from being abused.  Capitalism is no different.  That's why people keep using the term "late stage capitalism."  Just as communism has huge weaknesses that let it be gamed so that it functions in a way to fuck people over instead of creating any utopia, so capitalism has weaknesses.  It can be exploited by people acting in bad-faith to further stack and skew the rules and odds in their favor, creating more and more divergent outcomes, to the point of creating oligarchs.  Oligarchs are bad.  Whether they stole the money (Putin's pals) or "earned" it by exploiting a system that they and theirs helped game, or even if they earned it fair and square.  "I have enough money to control a country/the world" is generally not good for everyone else.

Our kids see that.  They also see non-oligarchs willing to fucking beat and gas kids to keep them from even saying "hey....maybe having oligarchs is bad for us."  It's not just cruel and pointless, it's stupid and nonsensical.  Oligarchs are bad enough.  Masses willing to fight to protect oligarchs ("billionaire defended") is inexplicably bad. 

[PTINS 3442]

19 hours ago, F250 said:

Yeah, youth games were not heavily attended by parents back in the 80s.

I remember going to my oldest son's first school football game when he was a 7th grader. In my mind, I was expecting it to be like my middle school football games. I was expecting about a dozen dads standing around and maybe a handful of students.

I was wrong. I walked into a mini-stadium that was at capacity. There was an announcer, cheerleaders, band music and a half-time show for 7th grade football, which is the oddest level of football.

I coached my sons T-Ball team in the late 90's. For the first Coach's meeting, they brought in the Coach from the High School; "This is the way we teach at the HS level, and this is the way we want you to teach."

Kids are picking daisy's in the outfield, and we're supposed to turn a 6 year old into Tony Gwynn?

Yeah, the Turf Bowl in Rhodes Stadium for Katy Youth Football was kinda' a big deal.

[DixonHur 11074]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I don't disagree, but that's my personal morality.  While, yes, how one consumes has external effects, by and large, one's personal "sins" don't affect me.  If he wants to use his money to produce and watch endless chimpanzee porn, I find that twisted and sick, but as long as no chimps are harmed in the making of "Naughty Bedtime for Bonzo," I really don't care.

If I had Elon money, I'd be much more focused on doing actual good with it - if I had absolute "fuck you" money, my main splurges would be private aircraft/first-class travel everywhere (probably first-class, it's more environmentally friendly to fly with others), nice hotels, nice meals, fishing charters, etc.  I'm not a big car guy.  I think that ostentatious displays of wealth are just that.  But that's me.  If you've always dreamed of shitting in a solid gold toilet, I'm not gonna squash your dream.

Capitalism per se isn't bad, it can be quite good.

Driving per se isn't bad, it can be quite good.

Unfettered, unregulated driving with zero concern for and utter contempt of everyone else out there is bad.  If you construct a giant bro-dozer and just run everyone else over, and go 100 mph through school zones, that's bad.  We need rules and regulations to keep any good thing from being abused.  Capitalism is no different.  That's why people keep using the term "late stage capitalism."  Just as communism has huge weaknesses that let it be gamed so that it functions in a way to fuck people over instead of creating any utopia, so capitalism has weaknesses.  It can be exploited by people acting in bad-faith to further stack and skew the rules and odds in their favor, creating more and more divergent outcomes, to the point of creating oligarchs.  Oligarchs are bad.  Whether they stole the money (Putin's pals) or "earned" it by exploiting a system that they and theirs helped game, or even if they earned it fair and square.  "I have enough money to control a country/the world" is generally not good for everyone else.

Our kids see that.  They also see non-oligarchs willing to fucking beat and gas kids to keep them from even saying "hey....maybe having oligarchs is bad for us."  It's not just cruel and pointless, it's stupid and nonsensical.  Oligarchs are bad enough.  Masses willing to fight to protect oligarchs ("billionaire defended") is inexplicably bad. 

I'm not a full-blown stoic, so I have no problem with how people spend their money per se.  But I think we've reached, or more to the point, exceeded, the point in which the gap between the haves and have nots isn't healthy.  

And I'm tired to people (not you) assuming the only two options are the current form of capitalism or communism.

I think there has to be a better way, and I think the 50's and 60's are good examples of how things could be...setting aside the white male only aspects.  I hold the Obama, "you didn't build that" by yourself mentality. 

I'd rather see a form of capitalism in which everyone participates in the successes of the companies they work for, not just the C-suite.  Would companies have lower profit margins?  Absolutely, but if you can't pay your employees a decent wage, then perhaps your business isn't viable in the first place.  

[Brisketexan 104462]

Just now, DixonHur said:

I'm not a full-blown stoic, so I have no problem with how people spend their money per se.  But I think we've reached, or more to the point, exceeded, the point in which the gap between the haves and have nots isn't healthy.  

And I'm tired to people (not you) assuming the only two options are the current form of capitalism or communism.

I think there has to be a better way, and I think the 50's and 60's are good examples of how things could be...setting aside the white male only aspects.  I hold the Obama, "you didn't build that" by yourself mentality. 

I'd rather see a form of capitalism in which everyone participates in the successes of the companies they work for, not just the C-suite.  Would companies have lower profit margins?  Absolutely, but if you can't pay your employees a decent wage, then perhaps your business isn't viable in the first place.  

To capture the goal in a pithy term, "a rising tide lifts all boats."  That's the way it should be.  Understanding that there will be some disproportionality to that -- if the low-end worker is making $50k, and the CEO is making $1 million, then a 10% increase in financial performance is going to mean a mere $5k more to the lower worker, and $100k to the CEO.  I think that MOST people (outside of the raging socialist types, who certainly exist) are fine with that.

A big problem is that the rising tide of the last 40+ years hasn't lifted all boats in proportion.  The worker is making $50k...and has seen his real wages stagnate as productivity has shot up.  The CEO that was making $1 million is now making $20 million, and gets huge increases in compensation when productivity soars.

And yes, when as a society we did things like invest in our education system, our infrastructure, our universities, and the people attending them, we yielded healthy dividends.  We HAVE to get away from our current spike of toxic individualism (how DARE you say I didn't earn every dollar myself, man-against-the-wilderness, I had no help at all!....except a system that has a rule of law so I could enforce my contract to get paid, except for the education I got from good public schools and universities that equipped me to succeed, except for the transportation system that allows me to get my goods to market reliably and at a low cost, etc. etc. etc.) and recapture some sense of the commonwealth/the common good.  We all do better when we all do better.

[safe sex 11659]

GE used to be proud of how much they paid their employees, and the high quality of benefits they provided. It was a huge part of their marketing for new hires. 

Guess which exec killed that off?

[Biff Tannen 45477]

4 minutes ago, safe sex said:

GE used to be proud of how much they paid their employees, and the high quality of benefits they provided. It was a huge part of their marketing for new hires. 

Guess which exec killed that off?

Obama?

[YGIFS 19449]

38 minutes ago, PTINS said:

I coached my sons T-Ball team in the late 90's. For the first Coach's meeting, they brought in the Coach from the High School; "This is the way we teach at the HS level, and this is the way we want you to teach."

Kids are picking daisy's in the outfield, and we're supposed to turn a 6 year old into Tony Gwynn?

Yeah, the Turf Bowl in Rhodes Stadium for Katy Youth Football was kinda' a big deal.

And that 6 year old's name?  You guessed it.  Tony Gwynn! 

We live literally in the shadow of one of the biggest football powerhouse High Schools in all of the Lone Star State.  And I still chuckle at some of the dad's I know who ask me about connecting them with UT coaches and scholarship folks so their sons can get a leg up on the competition before college applications/recruiting season ramps up.  And I have to maintain a straight face when a parental couple, both of whom are 5'7" in heels ask me about basketball chances for their boy.  Or a kid who can't even figure out how to put on a baseball glove at 12, let alone hit a breaking ball.  And no, your kid who is still having trouble with the alphabet in middle school is probably not gonna get a letter of recommendation from me for any university.  

My oldest has been doing some more sporting leagues this last two years since we came outta Covid.  And I love that she realizes first and foremost-be a good teammate.  Second-respect the rules.  Third-worry about winning.  In that order.  Precisely.  And despite the competitive nature of the community in Austin which we find ourselves, all of the leagues/tournaments/sports have been pretty chill and kinda follow the order I just described.  But on Sunday, her team finally ran into one of those teams run by two asshats who think every girl on their squad is gonna play championship volleyball at UT someday.  And they sure as shit acted the part.  It was like watching Coach Bobby Knight scream at 9 year olds.  On Mother's Day, mind you.  

Teach 'em teamwork, respect for rules and officials.  Then scores/wins.  And pepper in fun wherever you can.  Spoiler alert---do the math.  There's a very finite number of roster spots for student-athletes of any gender, in a fixed number of sports across three divisions and NAIA (only 50% of which actually award athletic scholarships, and even then only partial for the most part).  

Statistically speaking, your kid has a better chance of becoming a paid rally car racer than a paid NIL baseball player at a D1 program.  Maybe some folks should tap the brakes, hug their kids, and teach them Mandarin.  

[BabaYaga 15202]

23 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

and teach them Mandarin.  

das wasis.....

[BabaYaga 15202]

31 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

And that 6 year old's name?  You guessed it.  Tony Gwynn! 

We live literally in the shadow of one of the biggest football powerhouse High Schools in all of the Lone Star State.  And I still chuckle at some of the dad's I know who ask me about connecting them with UT coaches and scholarship folks so their sons can get a leg up on the competition before college applications/recruiting season ramps up.  And I have to maintain a straight face when a parental couple, both of whom are 5'7" in heels ask me about basketball chances for their boy.  Or a kid who can't even figure out how to put on a baseball glove at 12, let alone hit a breaking ball.  And no, your kid who is still having trouble with the alphabet in middle school is probably not gonna get a letter of recommendation from me for any university.  

My oldest has been doing some more sporting leagues this last two years since we came outta Covid.  And I love that she realizes first and foremost-be a good teammate.  Second-respect the rules.  Third-worry about winning.  In that order.  Precisely.  And despite the competitive nature of the community in Austin which we find ourselves, all of the leagues/tournaments/sports have been pretty chill and kinda follow the order I just described.  But on Sunday, her team finally ran into one of those teams run by two asshats who think every girl on their squad is gonna play championship volleyball at UT someday.  And they sure as shit acted the part.  It was like watching Coach Bobby Knight scream at 9 year olds.  On Mother's Day, mind you.  

Teach 'em teamwork, respect for rules and officials.  Then scores/wins.  And pepper in fun wherever you can.  Spoiler alert---do the math.  There's a very finite number of roster spots for student-athletes of any gender, in a fixed number of sports across three divisions and NAIA (only 50% of which actually award athletic scholarships, and even then only partial for the most part).  

Statistically speaking, your kid has a better chance of becoming a paid rally car racer than a paid NIL baseball player at a D1 program.  Maybe some folks should tap the brakes, hug their kids, and teach them Mandarin.  

The kid has to want it on their own.  That's what you can't "teach".  My son pivoted and it going in another direction from sports.  The other is a complete little psychopath I have to reign that one back to keep from redlining all the time.  Both will be successful (I pray) in whatever fields they go into.  Sports teaches a lot.  One oft overlooked facet is just good old fashioned grit.  If you have to scream at the kids to get them to perform, it's the coaching equivalent of a sugar-rush.  It works initially, but quickly wears off and doesn't provide much staying power.  Teach them about goals.  Setting them.  Achieving them.  From talking to other parents who have walked the walk through D1 athletics, also be careful what you wish for.  There's a reason there are so few of them out there.  It's fucking hard and can grind you into moon dust.  They also can get hurt.  Now what?  What's the fallback plan?  You can lose an ACL.  Grit is harder to come by.  

I love seeing Texas players make it to the NFL.  What I love even more, players that were marginal or got hurt, and you find out later they have graduate degrees and are crushing it in life off the field.  

Edited May 13 by BabaYaga

[Brisketexan 104462]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

From talking to other parents who have walked the walk through D1 athletics, also be careful what you wish for.  There's a reason there are so few of them out there.  It's fucking hard and can grind you into moon dust.  They also can get hurt.  Now what?

My kids have several college-level athletes from among their friend/acquaintances ranks.  Some are quite close friends, some are just kids they knew.  None of these kids are "world class, major league" talents.  They were all good enough to play a sport/swim etc. in college.

Without exception....all of them didn't care for the experience in some degree.  The time it took, the toll on the body, the culture around it -- for various reasons, they either hung it up before their college career was done, or regret sticking with it through the end.  I'm sure for those who are genuine world-class talents (as in, will likely do it professionally), the take can be different.  But as the old Big XII ads pointed out, 95% of college athletes will be going pro in something other than athletics.  Most of those kids had "grit" - they stuck with something long enough to make it to the college level.  But reality sinks in.  You're killing yourself and taking away damned near everything else in your life for the single-minded pursuit of....one athletic endeavor.  Not me.  In college, I chased both beer AND girls.  And I went fishing.  And hunting.  And on road trips.  And I made friends from a variety of circles.  And I chased more beer, and more girls.

If you want your kid to get a college scholarship, you're much better off paying for tutors and test-prep courses.  Those things have the added advantage of helping them get educated, too.

[YGIFS 19449]

17 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The kid has to want it on their own.  That's what you can't "teach".  My son pivoted and it going in another direction from sports.  The other is a complete little psychopath I have to reign that one back to keep from redlining all the time.  Both will be successful (I pray) in whatever fields they go into.  Sports teaches a lot.  One oft overlooked facet is just good old fashioned grit.  If you have to scream at the kids to get them to perform, it's the coaching equivalent of a sugar-rush.  It works initially, but quickly wears off and doesn't provide much staying power.  Teach them about goals.  Setting them.  Achieving them.  From talking to other parents who have walked the walk through D1 athletics, also be careful what you wish for.  There's a reason there are so few of them out there.  It's fucking hard and can grind you into moon dust.  They also can get hurt.  Now what?  What's the fallback plan?  You can lose an ACL.  Grit is harder to come by.  

I love seeing Texas players make it to the NFL.  What I love even more, players that were marginal or got hurt, and you find out later they have graduate degrees and are crushing it in life off the field.  

Yep, good points all.  I want my girls to learn teamwork and sportsmanship and hustle and determination.  And so far the leagues have been all about that and a buncha fun mixed in.  but I guess my oldest is just at that age now where some parents and coaches are getting so much more serious and 'ass-holish.'  And she's got these friends who are into cheer camps and away tours/competitions/whatever.  Which every box-faced East Texas female has-been needs to remember, is actually the sport with the most injuries:participant ration than any other athletic endeavor and spoiler alert---even if you're awesome and don't sustain an neck injury doing it---there's no fucking money in it.  It just abuses young girls like a Catholic Priest on sabbatical.  

I mean, I look back at my baseball and swim coaches (I played a few others but was only good at these two so had lots of intensive experiences) and yeah--they were assholes and mean but it was underneath about teamwork and effort and respect for the game.  Then about 20 years ago somebody got wise and invented an sub-industry where all of the sudden, despite a static number of scholarships and roster spots, that every kid was uber-talented and for just 8 weeks and $2000, your child can go from good to great to exceptional.  And also, we'll need you to set aside every weekend of your life for the next 14 years and get ready to put serious mileage on your vehicle.  

Sports and Politics.  The ability to manipulate stupid people reigns supreme.  As per usual, my prize lack of imagination.  

[956 Worldwide 34313]

Just so we are clear, in the 1950s and 1960s we keep referring to, we imposed taxes of up to 90 percent on the highest bracket, only falling into the 30s in the 1980s (which is when we began to look at the crazy rising CEO pay rate). Raising taxes substantially on the extreme upper end of the compensation spectrum will heavily disincent those sorts of packages and will boost revenue and provide for more services than implementing some sort of “wage speed limit.”  The blueprint is all there. 
 

To that I’d include a wealth tax and larger inheritance taxes. 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Just so we are clear, in the 1950s and 1960s we keep referring to, we imposed taxes of up to 90 percent on the highest bracket, only falling into the 30s in the 1980s (which is when we began to look at the crazy rising CEO pay rate). Raising taxes substantially on the extreme upper end of the compensation spectrum will heavily disincent those sorts of packages and will boost revenue and provide for more services than implementing some sort of “wage speed limit.”  The blueprint is all there. 
 

To that I’d include a wealth tax and larger inheritance taxes. 

Now you've done it.

[immamac 42492]

11 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Just so we are clear, in the 1950s and 1960s we keep referring to, we imposed taxes of up to 90 percent on the highest bracket, only falling into the 30s in the 1980s (which is when we began to look at the crazy rising CEO pay rate). Raising taxes substantially on the extreme upper end of the compensation spectrum will heavily disincent those sorts of packages and will boost revenue and provide for more services than implementing some sort of “wage speed limit.”  The blueprint is all there. 
 

To that I’d include a wealth tax and larger inheritance taxes. 

It’s incredible to me how much this message is not being covered in any media. Biden admin must think hiding things is better than being honest and telling people what’s coming. 

[Brisketexan 104462]

33 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Then about 20 years ago somebody got wise and invented an sub-industry where all of the sudden, despite a static number of scholarships and roster spots, that every kid was uber-talented and for just 8 weeks and $2000, your child can go from good to great to exceptional.  And also, we'll need you to set aside every weekend of your life for the next 14 years and get ready to put serious mileage on your vehicle.  

And....it makes no difference as to whether your kid is going to get a scholarship to a good university or not.   Sure, if you're marginal, maybe putting in exceptional effort bumps you up to get an offer from D2 or D3 U, congrats on your admission and free tuition to Bridgewater State U.  But let's be clear: functionally ZERO kids who get a scholarship offer to a good D1 school (UT, Purdue, Michigan, what have you) got that offer because of the 6 summers they spent playing select ball or somesuch.  When it comes to having D1-level talent, it's a lot like having pro-level talent: you either have it, or you don't.

I remember reading about baseball scouts who could go to high school baseball showcases, with 100 players out on the field showing their stuff.  The scouts commented that they could tell from watching around 30 seconds of a player's action whether he had the stuff to be considered a real prospect, and out of those 100, MAYBE 2-3 players would make that initial cut.  And that's just to be considered a prospect, not a lock to actually make it to the next level.  And I know I've told the story around here about my old law partner whose kids played youth sports with Drew Brees.  It didn't matter if it was blindfolded Albanian Badminton they were playing, Drew was the best athlete on the field.  At everything, always, since he was 5 years old.  No amount of practice or clinics or select ball was going to turn my friend's athletic, skilled kids into Drew Brees.  And Drew's family didn't even let him start playing "select" ball (which everyone else wanted him to do) until late middle school or something like that.  He didn't miss out on any development because he missed several seasons of select ball.  He's got an earned Super Bowl MVP trophy, because he was a god-given great athlete.  That's what it takes.

My son is a good baseball player.  He loves it, played since T-ball.  He's playing now, in an adult rec league overseas, and it makes him happy.  He's one of the better players on a top squad, but he's far from the best.  He gets the experience of being part of a team, meeting folks, travel for games, all the good stuff you want out of sports.  Kids will have a pretty healthy attitude about sports, if their parents will get out of the way.

Tying back to the thread topic: I think the kids are, all-in-all, alright.  It's the adults who are fucky.

[YGIFS 19449]

Yeah, sometimes the people yelling the loudest about this generation could maybe take a time-out and reflect on they're the ones who raised them.  So goes the 100,000 year old tale of humanity.  

Speaking of Drew Brees and natural talent.  We live a block over from his Dad.  And for a few years, the Colt McCoy and his family lived across the street from them.  One day, I'm walking my oldest to play with Colt's oldest.  And Drew is over with his boy and they're tossing the pigskin with his Dad in the frontyard and Colt's girl meets us in the front yard.  I don't say anything, and the little Brees guy tosses the ball to Colt's girl.  And for a second, I thought---my god---if they grow up and get married and have a son---he'd be the greatest QB in the history of the galaxy.  But instead, the McCoys moved and the guy now largely considered one of the great QB's of all-time blames his lack of production this season on a government conspiracy to silence him because his anti-vaccine stance.  While Colt and Drew live happy lives and I need to get on some mental health meds.  This fucking simulation.  Goddammit!  

[956 Worldwide 34313]

Way back in the early 2000s, I had a a friend who played D2 volleyball on a partial scholarship who went over how much cash her dad spent on club teams and travel and etc but “then I got a scholarship so all worth it.” She did not respond well to the info that all that money dropped into a 529 account would have covered the partial scholarship and much more. 

[Brisketexan 104462]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Way back in the early 2000s, I had a a friend who played D2 volleyball on a partial scholarship who went over how much cash her dad spent on club teams and travel and etc but “then I got a scholarship so all worth it.” She did not respond well to the info that all that money dropped into a 529 account would have covered the partial scholarship and much more. 

Bingo.  99% of parents who say shit like "all of this time and money is an investment to get my kid an athletic scholarship!" are very, very, very bad at math.

[956 Worldwide 34313]

To be clear, I support parents being behind kids and helping them excel and pursue sports or music or whatever.  Just go in with your eyes open and don’t pretend that it’s an investment for a scholarship. Even below the D1 level, doing college sports is absolutely doing college on hard mode and if the goal is education, then make it about education. 

[YGIFS 19449]

Yep, as posted above.  There are obvious benefits to team sports.  In the end, you're better off though just doing a couple things per year, saving your time and money and travel, and putting it towards academics or art or music.  In the end, worst case scenario---the kid gets knowledge or an instrument or art media that doesn't conk out at 25 but rather lasts until 95.  

Every year, I have the good fortunate to give out a lot of other people's money for myriad scholarships.  And invariably when we go the part about, "Describe a leadership setback or challenge you've experienced and how you overcame it."  90% of the kids will say something to the effect of, "On my high school sports team, we were losing and I had to rally my teammates to try harder like a less convincing Gene Hackman in Hoosiers." And the other 10% will have a narrative akin to "I saw xyz issue going unaddressed in my school/family/church/community so while I'm not an extrovert or vocal, I decided to step up, chart a path, and lead the way."  That second kid gets my vote every time.  

I don't care how many weekends you spent on a travel team to do some 9-hour competition in Houston in basketball or badminton.  That's all well and good.  But the kid who spends that many weekends learning another language or starting a non-profit or just helping old people clean their gutters.  They get the scholarship almost every time.  There is character to be built on the court and even in practice, but that's when coach is watching.  I respect the kid that does the work when nobody is looking or clapping.  

[DixonHur 11074]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

To capture the goal in a pithy term, "a rising tide lifts all boats." 

100% this. 

Imagine what it would do for the economy as a whole if more money was in the hands of the people who would actually spend it on food, clothing, housing, etc... instead of tied up in the investment accounts of billionaires.

[DixonHur 11074]

2 hours ago, YGIFS said:

both of whom are 5'7" in heels

Wait, you know the DeSantis'?

[F250 28659]

There is something about baseball that gets in your blood and makes it hard to quit. I have seen a lot of grown men "chase the dragon" when it comes to baseball. Many players have a strong desire to keep trying to level up in the sport even if it's detrimental to the future. It's similar to aging musicians that keep waiting for their big break that will never come.

Baseball has a lot of opportunities to play after high school but many of those are not very promising for a good financial future. The responsibility of a parent is to guide their almost grown child to make good decisions.

It's on the parents to teach their kids about opportunity cost and what that means if they pursue college baseball at a JUCO or any college including D1 if it doesn't contribute to their future and inevitable job outside of baseball.