1) The article also mentions serious methodological questions about the study, including the number of participants involved.
2) The NFL does have a vested financial interest in minimizing the perceived risk of head injury: the GQ article I linked to earlier seems to indicate that reducing the risk of concussion-related injuries would require a serious overhaul of the entire sport.
3) There's no guaranteeing that the same experts conducting studies on concussions would receive cushy consulting gigs. To date, the relationship between brain researchers and the NFL has been largely antagonistic.
Agreed, and I'm not accusing liberals of hypocrisy. I just think that the post - whatever its analytical faults - gets at a larger truth about progressive governance. Namely, it's easier to be liberal in a more homogeneous community.
Living in Austin, instead of lapping it up in progressive Texan shangli-la, I get the creeping sense of being “left behind”. Nearly all of my cousins in my young age (20s-30s) have moved to Houston after high school because there is “culture”. When I’ve told my white friends, they look at me with incredulity. They don’t understand. But, “old South” may have ended for white Austin, but, after the 60s, it never did elsewhere for black and hispanics, except with a ’90s high tech bang with massive white incoming and rising home prices (far beyond average minority incomes).
As a result, Black and hispanic east Austin is dying. The people know it. The city of Austin and its downtown plan expect it. And, cynically, both the young and old minorities suspect, they won’t be missed. After all, their positioning in east Austin was a consequence for “old South” segregation. Well, nothing lasts forever, and what the real estate market gave, the market now takes away..and for some young minorities, time to go to a new “promiseland”.
Surely we can argue that DC and Portland are progressive for different reasons, though. One leans liberal because of a (frequently uneasy) coalition between upscale liberals and poor minorities; the other has done away with one half of that coalition. But Portland, not DC or Atlanta, seems to be the preferred model for progressive governance.
I'm happy to debate our policy response to global warming; I think it's absurd, however, to suggest that the public is equipped to assess the relevant scientific data.
I'm incredibly surprised (and gratified) to find you hanging out in our comments section. For what it's worth, I was huge of Positively Fifth Street, which inspired my roommates and I to spend an inordinate amount of time playing Texas Hold 'Em in college. Thanks for the tip!
Surely we can acknowledge that Zeppelin is both derivative and incredibly influential?
As far as aesthetics are concerned, Creed's lyrics are awful, Stapp's vocals are mind-numbingly bombastic, and the riffage - while competent - is totally indistinguishable from a thousand other Pearl Jam rip-offs.
I'm not a huge Zeppelin fan, but I think they deserve credit for creating a unique (and incredibly influential) musical aesthetic. Creed, on the other hand, just sounds incredibly derivative. I mean, they're a cheap Pearl Jam knock-off.
I think her argument is that even if libertarianism doesn't condone active government intervention to address, say, longstanding sexism, libertarians should still do what they can to solve problems that go beyond the realm of property rights and contracts.
Just to clarify my thinking, when I say we should "let everyone hash things out," I mean that localities should be given broad discretion to address problems like the child-parent scenario outlined above. In other words, you might have a county or a town adopt a hands-off approach towards parental rights. Its immediate neighbor, however, may take a more proactive stance to protect children from indoctrination.
So ownership and the uncoerced exchange of goods and services are entirely incidental to the idea of freedom? Come on. I understand that some libertarians fetishize property rights to an absurd extent, but that doesn't mean they aren't important.
On “NFL “debunks” player concussion studies”
Zach -
A couple of points :
1) The article also mentions serious methodological questions about the study, including the number of participants involved.
2) The NFL does have a vested financial interest in minimizing the perceived risk of head injury: the GQ article I linked to earlier seems to indicate that reducing the risk of concussion-related injuries would require a serious overhaul of the entire sport.
3) There's no guaranteeing that the same experts conducting studies on concussions would receive cushy consulting gigs. To date, the relationship between brain researchers and the NFL has been largely antagonistic.
On “The Real Story”
Heh. After reading that article, I'm incredibly tempted to make a disparaging comment about the WNBA.
On “The New White City”
Kyle -
That Times article was a nice find - thanks!
On ““The Rise of Nuclear Alarmism””
Damn, I'm really jealous.
On “The New White City”
Agreed, and I'm not accusing liberals of hypocrisy. I just think that the post - whatever its analytical faults - gets at a larger truth about progressive governance. Namely, it's easier to be liberal in a more homogeneous community.
"
David44 -
The author posted a few additional thoughts on his blog. I think this addresses your comment:
"
Surely we can argue that DC and Portland are progressive for different reasons, though. One leans liberal because of a (frequently uneasy) coalition between upscale liberals and poor minorities; the other has done away with one half of that coalition. But Portland, not DC or Atlanta, seems to be the preferred model for progressive governance.
On “The public’s opinion of the accuracy of climate change science is, frankly, irrelevant”
I'm happy to debate our policy response to global warming; I think it's absurd, however, to suggest that the public is equipped to assess the relevant scientific data.
On “Nullification!”
I've seen them three times, and they're never very loquacious. But they do play a great live set.
On “What Poker Can Teach Us”
Jim McManus -
I'm incredibly surprised (and gratified) to find you hanging out in our comments section. For what it's worth, I was huge of Positively Fifth Street, which inspired my roommates and I to spend an inordinate amount of time playing Texas Hold 'Em in college. Thanks for the tip!
Jaybird -
You win this thread.
On “Float On”
Will Wilson -
That sounds absolutely awesome. Pencil me in as a definite maybe. Can I bring a friend or two for the crew?
On “The Meaning of Water and Wine”
Dierkes -
This was some epic war cleric smiting. Well done, sir.
On “Bleg”
I think you should put this on the main page, Mark.
On “Mad Men”
Yeah, sorry about that. The curse of tabbed browsing.
On “This is all an elaborate joke, right?”
Surely we can acknowledge that Zeppelin is both derivative and incredibly influential?
As far as aesthetics are concerned, Creed's lyrics are awful, Stapp's vocals are mind-numbingly bombastic, and the riffage - while competent - is totally indistinguishable from a thousand other Pearl Jam rip-offs.
"
I'm not a huge Zeppelin fan, but I think they deserve credit for creating a unique (and incredibly influential) musical aesthetic. Creed, on the other hand, just sounds incredibly derivative. I mean, they're a cheap Pearl Jam knock-off.
"
This comment is just an incredibly meta joke-within-a-joke, right? Right?
On “You can go your own way”
Sam M -
I think her argument is that even if libertarianism doesn't condone active government intervention to address, say, longstanding sexism, libertarians should still do what they can to solve problems that go beyond the realm of property rights and contracts.
"
Just to clarify my thinking, when I say we should "let everyone hash things out," I mean that localities should be given broad discretion to address problems like the child-parent scenario outlined above. In other words, you might have a county or a town adopt a hands-off approach towards parental rights. Its immediate neighbor, however, may take a more proactive stance to protect children from indoctrination.
On “nota bene”
For the record, I'm ahead of the damn curve here. I pimped that article months ago:
http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/08/more-boozing/
On “Are Property Rights Enough?”
So ownership and the uncoerced exchange of goods and services are entirely incidental to the idea of freedom? Come on. I understand that some libertarians fetishize property rights to an absurd extent, but that doesn't mean they aren't important.
On “Sunday Poem Series”
Great pick, Freddie.
On “Deep Inside of a Parallel Universe”
Also, Jerry O'Connell. Worst actor of our generation?
On “Friendly advice”
OMFG.
On “Quote of the Day”
Ebert is a national treasure. The LXG review was great, but his best take down, for my money, was the Jay Mariotti goodbye letter:
http://deadspin.com/5043228/roger-ebert-gives-jay-mariotti-a-strategically-placed-thumb-on-his-way-out-the-door
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.