BANNED USER: Ban extended for arguing in edits
>Unban in 53d 02h 23m
Opt-out
No bio...
User ID: 4089
Banned by: @Amadan
Opt-out
24d ago
Analytics I think has ruined the in-game baseball experience now. The movement to 3-outcome players (walk, strike-out, home run) means that when you watch the game in the stadium you can’t see most of the action.
The pitcher-batter battle I think has greatly improved but you only see that watching on tv.
The costs of attendance seems to be a function of a K-Shaped economy. You can find cheap tickets to watch second tier games.
Opt-out
24d ago
Football is not a “dangerous niche sport”. Whatever metric you use (except personally playing) it’s going to be 1 or 2 and in most cases that’s against the other sport called football. Quick google it’s second in professional revenue (this doesn’t count college which you probably should). I’d be shocked if football wasn’t number 1 in gambling.
It does seem at younger levels its popularity is shrinking which I think is a bad thing because the average young male does need an outlet for controlled violence.
Opt-out
24d ago
Honestly I put up big numbers when that ended. I suck at momo trading. But once AI stocks quit going up you started seeing big moves in every other name. It’s a function of how indexes affect the market.
Markets just price new ideas faster today. It’s possible we see another crazy rally in AI stocks but things like Micron went firm 300-1200 in that time period. You can’t have sectors 4x every 2 months.
Opt-out
24d ago
In modern America no. Marriage is forever and includes duties and responsibilities, other religions I would consider to have marriage in that Sense.
Modern American definition of marriage is not marriage. It’s a short term cancelable contract.
Opt-out
24d ago
“ Do you think people who do not take Christian wedding vows should not be treated as legally married?”
- This is true. They should be civil unions. Or a contract because they are essentially a relationship contract and not the broader meaning of marriage developed over centuries. Marriage is forever with specific duties and responsibilities attached to the partners.
Opt-out
24d ago
I too have toyed with this idea on whether the position you play affects your personality or your personality chooses your position. It’s interesting in football because you largely do not get to pick your position because positions require very specific athletic traits. I can think of only like 2 guys who really played a position not meant for their body type - Jerome Bettis (300lb running back) and Levon Kirkland (essentially 300 lb middle linebacker). With how the game has evolved I am not sure either of them could do that today. They would be sent straight to IDL.
I can’t exactly quantify it, but WR just sticks out to me as a position with what can best be described as impulse control. Just off the top of my head George Pickens, Antonio Brown, Rashee Rice, Josh Gordon, Henry Ruggs , Randy Moss and Tyreek Hill jump out to me for having issues. Athletically they are similar to DB’s and RB’s but their personalities and legal issues seem different.
So it does seem to be an interesting question on whether innate personality helps them as a WR or if playing the position nudged their personality in that direction.
Opt-out
24d ago
My view would be that you can reduce the high school football playing population to 10% of its current levels and you will still get enough players that are fun to watch. College football has far worse players than pro football (partially due to training) but it’s still highly popular. With modern sports training even with a “10%” initial population going thru a filter to NFL player the game would still be a lot better than 1970’s football. One could also make a comparison to pro hockey where they draw from a much smaller population set but still produce an entertaining pro product.
It’s possible the nfl crashes but the decline would need to be a lot bigger.
Opt-out
24d ago
Yes agree. It’s a big reason I believe Lamar Jackson can’t win a Super Bowl. The regular season he can perform at an elite level because teams are less willing to tailor their entire defense for one team. This is definitely not true in the playoffs and the Super Bowl specifically they have two weeks to prepare. I believe Jackson had a 9 wonderlich. This is one reason why I think Malik Willis could emerge as a stud. He’s still very fast but his wonderlich I believe was around 35.
Opt-out
25d ago
From first principles he basically rediscovers something close to the benefits of segregation. In America if you’re rich you can buy your way out of societal issues of our lower class. In his case he’s specifically referring to trans but the arguments holds for gun violence, safe schools, pretty neighborhoods that are maintained (no trash), and a host of other issues.
Europeans always looked down on America because we have a lot of social economic issues they don’t have (until recently). Their lower class got these things for free because they were homogenous populations. He’s a trad Catholic and to be honest I don’t think that exists much anywhere anymore, but if your a trad Catholic it’s nice just having a Catholic Church on every block and everyone in your community sharing the same beliefs. Probably the last bastion of trad Catholicism was Argentina but from the best I can tell they got the feminism virus.
Opt-out
25d ago
Of course it’s a monkey paw situation because if I didn’t create a tension then there wouldn’t be something to debate. I 100% the average NFL player is average to above average intelligence. Judging by responses it seems like people really don’t like the idea of giving up intelligence.
Not sure what it is about NFL WR but a lot seem to have poor impulse. I can pick a less of a Catspaw than you get to be AB or Tyreek Hill. You can be someone like Jerome Bettis. I don’t think he’s stupid but I doubt he’s on the right tail of IQ. Hasn’t been to jail. Seems to have a likable personality. If we are being honest he probably has a better QOL but I would still hate to give up thinking skills. AB is broke and probably does end up in jail today so I’ve removed the super negative catspaw.
Opt-out
25d ago
Reasonable. I did a cliche where you get to be a great athlete but you have to be really dumb as a trade-off, but most pro-athletes my gut says are above average intelligence. Something like 11 out of the last 14 Super Bowl winning QB scored above a 25 wonderlich, that’s a position that does require more intelligence.
Nobody here wants to bite the bullet and say they would take 20m a year and get to crazy athletic stuff with the downside that the outside world makes no sense to you.
Opt-out
25d ago
And no one says it does. The question is about do we want the United States of America monitoring people’s spousal life.
Opt-out
25d ago
The entire project of western civilization post pagan Rome was based on Christianity.
But regardless the old system just worked.
Opt-out
25d ago
People should be free to choose marriage and not have the government in their marriage.
And again your jumping to this “all leads to bad things”……nobody is saying you can’t get divorced.
The best proof I have is that today men blame women for being bad women and women blame men for being bad men. This shows up in polling. The old system just worked. It’s a Chesterton Fence. However human psychology evolved the relationship rules I’m describing just work. It’s pragmatic. It’s common good.
Opt-out
25d ago
Probably virtually zero here. Maybe we are just better at thinking thru things. Being a NFL star would obviously be a lot of fun plus money.
Being good at Football and being good at being smart are obviously not exclusive of each other. But for a thought experiment the trade off between one and the other is interesting.
I don’t know why but the WR position in the NFL seems to have a lot of people who can do crazy stuff physically but also seem to be completely dysfunctional outside of football. AB is the best brand. But there are others. Henry Ruggs couldn’t mentally realize that 160 mph in a Ferrari drunk has a significant risks of killing someone and ended up in jail. In the NBA Ja Morant got that too.
Opt-out
25d ago
So you don’t believe in freedom? Free people should not be able to choose their own systems?
This is obviously an improvement because people had happier marriages back in the day. It is exactly what you say - pragmatism.
I want women to be happy. I love women, I’m a feminists in the sense I’m pro-women.
I want the common good. I want happy women. People don’t actually want rights. They want successful relationships and happiness. I’m giving them that.
And yes giving a husband the right to beat his wife sounds bad but it made women happier. Part of that is because men also had many duties to women like if they needed to work in a steel mill 16 hours a day to provide material comfort to their wife……they did that.
In the Sopranos Michael was chastised for putting hands on his girlfriend by a higher ranking mafiosa whose girlfriend was his niece. And the mafiosa said it was none of his business if he put his name on her. Because then he would also have obligations to her.
A big part of marriage is your making commitments to each other. For a wife a large part of that commitment is sexual availability and children. And a man has a duty to provide. And I do think the wife’s commitment is a permanent consent. That’s what makes marriage special. And yes sometimes girls are lazy and I think marriage means a man has a right to take what has been promised to him.
This isn’t the same thing as saying “I want to allow men to be monsters to their wife”. I don’t want that. But I do not think the government should be litigating what happens in a marriage.
The whole reason gays wanted marriage and not civil unions is because marriage is something special. These trade-offs versus today’s legal marriage which is really just a contract are worth it.
I am not saying you should have an inability to leave. Personally I don’t believe in divorce, but in extreme cases I am fine with allowing some divorce.
Citation needed: TFR was higher than. And just on vibes it seems like most people died with a loving spouse back in the day. I’m not sure how you quantify “happy marriage”, but when I was growing up it seemed like there were a lot of happy old people. It just worked.
Where: Bible. Marriage was a Christian institution. “Be fruitful and multiple” is the first divine command given by god to mankind. The purpose of marriage has always been about children. Wives have a duty to use their body to create little humans. America is a Christian nation.
How does this interfere with a separation of church and state? I’m literally saying the government should not stand between two peoples religious vows.
Can I find a reputable religious figure? Does God count as I quoted above? He commands this.
And to be 100% clear my interpretation of marriage was the law of the land for 200 years. Changing it seems like it has been a bad idea.
Opt-out
25d ago
Marriage was better before the 1970’s. I am not going to pick and choose which policies we did back then that made marriage effective. Everyone I ever knew had happy grandparents.
I would kill the guy.
So you think the government should stand in-between marriage vows? I don’t want the government in my bedroom with my wife.
We do have a third way. People who want the government in their spousal relationships should get civil unions. People want to get married should get married.
Opt-out
25d ago
I am not seeing it listed as illegal. My University talked about having a responsibility like that. Perhaps not in a strictly legal away as that could bring on lawsuit risks but as a philosophy of what they are trying to do.
Opt-out
25d ago
This was the law of the land until the 1970s. Sorry I have old school Christian beliefs.
I also do not believe a husband should do this to his wife.
He can burn in hell for treating his wife poorly.
Opt-out
25d ago
No.
I think husbands should be good husbands. I do not believe a husband should have sex with her wife when she has legitimate pain or other issues. But I do not believe that is rape. Vows were exchanged. Both sides should follow their vows. But I do not believe the law should be involved in the relationship of a married couple.
I would never convict a man of raping his life because I don’t think the government should be involved in the relationship of married people.
Opt-out
26d ago
True. I guess my assumption was wrong. Honestly also assumed a NYC campus was fairly liberal with letting guest in and less loco parentis.
Opt-out
26d ago
Reasonable question if you haven’t come across FIT before. It usually pops up in the news when some rich girl or celebrity attends. It’s a NYC school. They have dorms for 2300 students with a total undergraduate population of 7900. It’s not a traditional residential college. My first guess would be these students were just renting a NYC apartment.
Opt-out
26d ago
Watching college football yesterday a friend was texting me about one of the better players being super quick. So the question I posed was would you trade your intelligence for getting to run like that? I have never wanted to be a pro sports player after I reached the age of like 7, but I do watch highlights of athletes getting to jump or basically fly and it looks like it would be a lot of fun. Most people here I assume do not have this skillset. To my question my friend replied depends how much money he gets.
So my question is would you trade your intelligence for getting to have that athletic ability. Basically you can do anything you want on a football field but the entire world outside the football field is complete confusion to you. I would say Antonio Brown is the leading brand of having no understanding of anything off the football field.
The reverse of AB I think would be someone like Leopold Aschenbrenner. Very high IQ. Like AB most of human society is something he does not get to be a part of. My gut says like 98% of humans would find him annoying but he’s fine when he stays in EA/AI type places. I am closer to this spectrum.
I’ve also been thinking of kinds of intelligence that I lack. I literally can not clean. And it’s not just laziness. My mind is just very bad at organizing things and I’m very messy. I feel like this is kind of common with people who are good at math. I remember in college math professors had the messiest offices. I noticed this when my cleaning ladies show up. My place can be a complete mess and in 2.5 hours the place is perfect after they arrive. To me this is absolute magic.
Thinking about different types of intelligence I feel it makes me more empathetic. I know I have some abilities that are absolute magic to other people. I know I have some weaknesses that no matter how hard I work I can’t do the tasks.
My answer to my original question is I would not give up intelligence for being a marvelous athlete. Getting to read Plato or the US Constitution and understand their arguments and reasoning is not something I would give up. But I would pay a lot of money to get to be a marvelous athlete for 1-day just to experience dunking over someone or being the best player in a college football game.
As for QOL being someone like Cam Heyward (I’m a Steelers fan) who seems like a functional human being is likely the highest QOL. He’s possibly too dumb to understand an index fund but smart enough to not get robbed by advisors and just pay a 1% tax to Goldman Sachs. Being someone like AB probably sucks because I am fairly certain everything off the field is magic to him.
If you read my rant I appreciate it.
Nefarious politics to MagicalKitty appears to be repeating true things the other side does that are highly unpopular.
In my view this is just well-run politics and normal.
I’m basically a 1-issue immigration voter now. So yes remind voters of Dems awful immigration policies.
If I had a second issue it’s boosting fertility. And transitioning people and trans culture is bad for fertility.
Budgetary stuff is unimportant compared to demographics. Money is fake. The Jews created Israel in 80 years with great demographics.
More options
Context Copy link