Friday assorted links

Comments

Who cares about what Democrats or Republicans think about celebrities. The real question is what do the largest bloc of voters - independents - think.

about 2/3 of independents are really Ds or Rs who don't associate with the name.

Actually, that number is closer to 90%. Nearly every independent consistently votes for the same party, at least in presidential and congressional elections. They call it "The Myth of the Independent Voter."

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Number #1 does not smell right. I can see how Serena Williams could be #1 among Democratic men (she's awesome). But there is no way Jay Cutler is popular, much less more than Lebron, or that anyone likes Floyd Mayweather.

I had the same reaction, those lists don't feel very plausible.

Comments for this post are closed

Yeah, I thought the same thing. Not a single NBA'er besides James? Not one MLB player. Terry Bradshaw and Darrelle Revis make the list, but no Tom Brady?

Comments for this post are closed

these polls probably help individual sports atheletes where local tribalism doesn't really apply. you choose who to like in golf or tennis/pick the americans instead of having a local guy thrust on you

Comments for this post are closed

Though, male Democrats seem to be the only group that understands that Sam Bradford is terrible

Comments for this post are closed

Sam Bradford #1 on female GOP and #3 on male GOP?

Seriously?

Obscure never successful QB rates this high?

Well, at least he still plays unlike 5! others on the female list.

This. How is Sam Bradford on any list of popular athletes???

Yes, impugns the whole methodology. Really, it does.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Probably because he's religious. He's a less annoying Tim Tebow that has actually managed to stay in the NFL, even if he's never been really good.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Some 90% of blacks vote Dem. Perhaps black men are very enamoured of Serena?

Where's Brady? Has Inflategate really hurt him that much? Cam Newton? And perhaps I'm dating myself in asking where's Charles Barkley?

Serena is a defensible number one without resorting to special racial pleading. She's been the best player in her sport for years and may be the GOAT of women's tennis. She's been famous for 15-16 years and has a huge public profile. None of the other athletes on these lists can match her accomplishments or her celebrity. And FWIW, you just have to have eyes to notice that Serena is stunning. But Sam Bradford, Jay Cutler, and Matt Forte are not defensible. I don't believe that female Democrats like Floyd Mayweather - a boxer who beats women. And I missed Julian Edelman the first time around. That's a serious WTF. He's never been a top 10 player at his position. Serena is the only thing about these lists that is not BS.

Great tennis player, absolute. Stunning? Well, there's no accounting for taste, but I don't think I'm alone in preferring a softer look in the female figure and face.

Comments for this post are closed

I second the eyeroll at 'stunning'. Most likely she's popular with Dem males as they have similar testosterone levels.

She has a far greater testosterone level than the average Dem male. [smiley face]

Comments for this post are closed

Hahahahahahah! Because Dem males are pussies! Oh man, you nailed it.

Comments for this post are closed

Not completely, I'd say she meets you at least half way :)

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Edelman is a white guy at a stereotypically black position. They are always popular.

Also, he's disproportionately popular in the Northeast, I'm sure, which is one of the few areas of the country where you find a lot of democrats among white male sports fans. I think that MAY be the explanation for the weird inclusion of Chicago Bears Matt Forte and Jay Cutler, but still...those guys are all more popular than Tom Brady or, say Brian Urlacher? I'm not buying it.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

IT does surprise that Serena Williams, a black woman, would be popular for Democrats. That seems unlikely unless the survey disproportionately consisted of black respondents. One would expect the average democrat to be more or less a racist, it fits the profile and policy decisions to a T.

Comments for this post are closed

Agreed that these lists are implausible. They become more plausible if only counting people who recognize the name, I guess.

On the other hand, slightly disappointed that the commenters pounce on Dems for including black athletes (Williams Mayweather etc.) but nobody calling out an all-white Republican favored athlete list.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

5. Lending to zombie companies seems to be an increasing problem in China, not unlike the credit extended to zombie banks in the US during the Great Recession. A more creative method of finance would be to secure loans with nude pictures. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/16/world/asia/to-secure-loans-chinese-women-supply-perilous-collateral-nude-photos.html

Comments for this post are closed

Real men shave their balls.

Comments for this post are closed

#1, Democratic women really love Matt Forte? How does this happen?

Do Richard Sherman and Matt forte have the same agent? Because if so I think I know who performed this study.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

2. Propitious time for women = Discrimination against men.

The correct and just manner for remedying historical discrimination is to end it, now, and let time and attrition right the boat. I don't want my daughters growing up believing that they are owed something, or were given something based on their gender that they didn't earn. I want them to be justly proud of their accomplishments to whatever field and level they get taken.

As a daughter, trust me, no woman feels like she's owed a damn thing. We all, however, feel like we have to work 2x as hard as our male brethren to get 1/2 as much credit. I don't want my white sons growing up thinking they're owed anything simply because they're white and male. How, pray tell, do we solve this much bigger problem?

First step is to get over the delusion that you have to work 2x as hard. That sounds like the biggest problem to me and must really hold you back.

You know, the delusion I had to get over was that I did not have to work harder than male colleagues. I didn't believe it through high-school, through college, and through my first few years in practice. But reality will eventually wake you up. If you choose not to recognize that reality, it's ok, you're a dying trend.

I've worked with many women, many are truly dedicated and hard working. On average, they do not out work their male counterparts. The ones who do often create the extra work for themselves, not in a good way. Chances are you just complicate the crap out of what you are working on and think you are working harder. Same results.

Comments for this post are closed

"I’ve worked with many women, many are truly dedicated and hard working. On average, they do not out work their male counterparts. The ones who do often create the extra work for themselves, not in a good way. Chances are you just complicate the crap out of what you are working on and think you are working harder. Same results."

Funny thing, you feel confident enough to diagnose my situation without knowing who I am, how I work, or really any facts besides these: (1) I am a woman; (2) who shared my personal experience. Chances are, it's much easier for you to make blanket assumptions without having sufficient information to make such assumptions, especially when those assumptions allow you to downplay sexism or a woman's own experience.

Comments for this post are closed

I can't speak to your particular situation, but no women do not work any multiple harder than men to obtain the same results. By every objective measure of performance I've never seen a woman leading in more than 30 years. I don't blame them because they chose to spend more time with their families than being aggressive at work. It's about preferences over lifestyles.

I challenge you to present objective evidence that women work harder than men.

Comments for this post are closed

"Chances are, it’s much easier for you to make blanket assumptions "

You mean blanket assumptions like, "Women work 2x as hard for 1/2 the credit"?

I've never seen this anywhere in my entire career except, perhaps, in college. Women appeared more studious and got better grades, on average, but men typically topped the classes. Young men are easily distracted.

But given the way I see society treating young men nowadays, I'm wouldn't be surprised if most of them have given up.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Yes, you "feel" it but its not true.

Do you bill 4000 hours? Do you work 100 hour weeks?

"We all"

No, you feel this way.

I'll send you documented facts. What's your email?

How about this: "I know." How does that make you feel?

If you really do work 2X as hard as the men at your place of employment and only get 1/2 of the credit, then you really ought to find another employer to work for where you will only have to work, say, 1.5X as hard and get 3/4 of the credit.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

I'm getting the sense there are more attorneys on this site than economists.

True, but it is obvious who the lawyers are and easy to ignore them.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

The #2 in the post says the exact opposite. Women of equal skill and accomplishments are preferred in academia over men, by everyone except by male economists.

Comments for this post are closed

News Flash - everyone (male and female) feels they work harder than their colleagues and get less credit than they deserve. If this belief is upsetting you, unless you have some hard third party evidence that it is true (like paid revenue to you) you should highly discount it.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Nothing against Roger Staubach, but how in the heck is so high on the list? He hasn't been relevant in sports for over 3 decades. Makes me wonder if the people surveyed were allowed to pick any sports figure, or they were presented with a list from which to choose.

Sounds like a lot of older folks responding there.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

@#4 - David by Mike Angelo- for the longest time this statue was incorrectly listed as 14 feet high instead of 17 feet, until a few years ago somebody actually measured it. Three feet is a big difference! NYT article did not mention this trivia.

Comments for this post are closed

Sorry I could not read the FT article.

But he other day you did an article stressing the point that Danish-Americans made more than Danes. But is this unusual? Do Japanese-Americans make more than Japanese and I could go down a long list of immigrant groups that I also suspect make more than the people in their home countries--like Greeks and Italians.. I bet that even Mexican-American make more than Mexicans.

If this is true than the point that Danish-Americans make more than Danes does not really mean anything significant about whether of not their economic-social system is better or worse than the American. The reason that XXXXX-Americans are richer than the people in their home country may only mean that the much larger American economy allows larger economies of
scale and larger markets and consequently more labor specialization and productivity

To make the conclusions you do from the point that Danish-Americans are richer than Danes you would have to show that this is unusual and that most immigrant groups in the USA do not make more than the people in their home countries. I seriously doubt that this true.

I think this is a very bad line of reasoning. It implies that small nations with high GDP per capita essentially can't exist. Singapore is the same size as Denmark but beats the US.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

General Kudos to Tyler for tipping us that foreign agents might become a bigger issue in this campaign. I just heard on the radio that Manafort organized "protesters who threw rocks at US troops"

Every shred of a rational Trump campaign is gone. The skilled executive, who only hires the best people, hired an authentic enemy of the United States.

Comments for this post are closed

I'm happy for Miles. He's become one of my favorite economists and Boulder is one of my favorite places. Although from my experience living in Boulder, the lack of bad weather and abundant outdoor activities decreases productivity.

Comments for this post are closed

#3...At least he didn't join those numbskulls at Stanford.

Comments for this post are closed

You have a bunch of white men talking in an echo chamber. Way to Cowen.

White male!

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

It's striking that no African-American athletes made the Republican top 10 lists. After all, that ethnic group dominates professional sports. But no Michael Jordan. No Tiger Woods. Zilch.

Striking but not surprising. As someone who grew up in a moderate GOP family it disturbs me how xenophobic the R's have become. To me, it feels that among conservatives , same race affiliation seems to have strengthened in the past 40 years; interracial antipathy feels like it has increased.

This racist drift does not get much attention amidst the broader racial moderation by progressives and moderates.

Xenophobia is fear of the other. It strikes me how afraid the average Democrat is of a rural white person. It strikes me how much effort the average Democrat puts in to segregating cities.

There are Democrats in this comment section complaining that white males exist in this comment section, and here you are surprised that after decades of racial antipathy towards white men from Democrats that white men are finally forming a block of identity politics.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

It's striking that no African-American athletes made the Republican top 10 lists. After all, that ethnic group dominates professional sports. But no Michael Jordan. No Tiger Woods. Zilch.

Striking but not surprising. As someone who grew up in a moderate GOP family it disturbs me how xenophobic the R's have become. To me, it feels that among conservatives , same race affiliation seems to have strengthened in the past 40 years; interracial antipathy feels like it has increased.

This racist drift does not get much attention amidst the increased racial tolerance among progressives and moderates. But I hypothesize it exists. I wonder if there are any studies that address this.

Comments for this post are closed

Why is the headline about STEM applicants when the what were studied were applicants in "biology, engineering, economics, and psychology."

Maybe it's just me. Does anyone else look askance at the inclusion of psychology as STEM? Perhaps at the PhD level, but do we really think that the vast majority of folks with BAs and MAs in psychology are in a STEM field?

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed