Jobless number soar:
The number of people filing initial claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week, while those filing continuing claims hit an all-time high for the 10th straight week, according to a government report released Thursday.
In the week ended March 28, 669,000 people filed initial jobless claims, up 12,000 from the previous week’s upwardly revised figure of 657,000, the Labor Department reported.
It was the largest weekly increase since October 1982, and it surprised economists surveyed by Briefing.com, who had forecast initial claims to decline to 650,000.
The number of people continuing to file for jobless benefits rose 161,000 to 5.7 million in the week ended March 21, the latest week for which data was available. It was the highest number since the government began keeping records in 1967, and the 10th consecutive week that continuing claims rose to a record high.
What these folks really need is a tax cut and a government spending freeze. Hopefully, many of them are located in South Carolina or Texas and won’t have their economic security threatened by excessive stimulus spending.
SpotWeld
And bootstraps, all they need is bootstraps!
(Forget that a lot of them are nearing the point where they can’t afford boots anymore)
zzyzx
I heard a "great" piece on Marketplace this morning about companies routinely challenging unemployment claims just in case they can find a reason to really do so. No problem, the challenged ex-worker will just get their checks to start up after the hearing… except that the hearings can take up to a year to happen.
Safety net? Who wants that in a recession? Quick! Destroy medicare!
This is the kind of environment that starts riots. You want to know how sociali$m really happens? It starts when people are so desperate that any change sounds good…
zzyzx
ARGH! I said the s word. Stupid filter…
TheFountainHead
These numbers are a referendum on Obama.
/wingnut
OT: Very much enjoying that the Furminator is getting such ad play here at BJ now.
C Nelson Reilly
That’s a lot of people going Galt at the same time
The Moar You Know
Works out to 23,000 jobs per day.
Tax breaks are surely in order.
SimplyOn
I think it’s only going to get worse.
Zandar
Continuing unemployment claims were about 4.45 million four months ago in early December, just about a 30% rise in those in roughly 16 weeks.
But the markets went up in the last 3 weeks and February home sales were up slightly, so RECESSION OVER! REFI NOW! HISTORICALLY LOW RATES!
Leelee for Obama
Just as God and Baby Jeebus intended.
I have to admit that I have been trying hard to stifle my natural Irish tendency to be depressed, but these numbers are really starting to scare the crap out of me.
If the Repubs have any sense (not likely, I know), they will withdraw from public view and let Obama jump out of the phone booth without any interferene.
We are really in the place my Mom always talked about from her youth. Thank the New Deal we at least had some protection from this banking mess or my Mom and I would be looking for a tent with her Social Secuirty. Sometimes I’m glad she really doesn’t know what’s going on anymore.
Zifnab
A stimulus was passed and well-received in the other 46 states. I wouldn’t start clutching my pearls just yet. I would, however, love to see the prospects Palin, Jindal, Sanford, and Perry will have for reelection.
This is the GOP last hurrah, and I imagine it will serve as a spectacular highlight over what works and what doesn’t. Once these clowns are done publicly parading their rejection of funds, we’ll know very clearly whether it was a smart move or not. You just need to compare South Carolina to North Carolina, Texas to California, Louisiana to Arkansas.
I’m confident that the Presidential stimulus is designed to do a great deal of good. I’ll be more than happy to sit back and let the results roll in. Then the GOP can go into another round of bullshit spin while the local leadership quietly lynches its grandstanding governors.
BenA
Mark Sanford knows the 11% of the state that’s unemployed in South Carolina wouldn’t want any socialist handouts… and their kids don’t need any teachers since there are no jobs for them when they grow up anyway.
MattF
What you mean is that the unemployed "takers" need a tax cut for the superior "makers". Survival is the ultimate entitlement, after all…
iluvsummr
@Leelee for Obama:
I was talking to my best friend and she said something that stuck with me — the US had been in the great depression for four years before FDR was elected. People knew how bad things were, so the obstructionists held less sway. Obama is trying to *prevent* a repeat. Since things aren’t yet as bad for most people as they were back in the 30s, the Republicans would like to get us to 33% unemployment with a Hooverite spending freeze so that we can relive the great depression and build up our character.
The Other Steve
I heard on the radio that Mark Sanford facing some opposition to his decision not to take stimulus money.
** Atanarjuat **
Oh yeah, that Porkulus Package is really turning things around, eh, liberals?
How many more jobs need to be shed and livelihoods destroyed before all of you see through the smoke and mirrors offered by Barack the Magic Teleprompter?
By the time Obama is done with destroying the economy, it may well be too late to do anything about it, but hey! You lefties sure will have shown those Evil Conservatards just who’s large and in charge.
Pathetic.
-A
wasabi gasp
About a month ago my girlfriend’s dad was training some new employees. A couple of weeks later the new employees were on a plane back to India with his job. Fifteen: the number of years on the job as well as the number of days of health insurance they let him leave with.
Libby
The numbers are vaguely terrifying for an old lady without a job but I keep reminding myself of my favorite maxim.
The bad news is nothing good lasts forever. The good news is, nothing bad does either…
Micheline
@** Atanarjuat **: Troll the stimulus hass’t yet been implemented, so what are you talking about?
Robin G.
@Zifnab: How much of the stimulus package is really not being taken by SC, TX, and LA? I was under the impression that the governors were loudly grandstanding, but when you looked at the numbers the states were still taking, oh, 97% of the money offered.
I could be wrong, and things may have changed since I last looked, but it seemed to me that it was basically all one big BS routine wherein the governors got to parade around like peacocks without having to actually give anything up.
Leelee for Obama
@** Atanarjuat **:
Since I am not convinced that you really are a spoof, I say to you that that’s a debate I’m happy to have. May the best plans succeed. Your side had plenty of time, and failed collosally so let them step out and wait.
4tehlulz
@** Atanarjuat **: 1/10 No rage induced.
You’re slipping.
Gus
Is it just me, or has the fact that the economy continues to worsen seem to be getting little play in the media? It seems we’re back to an American Idol/White House garden/NCAA tournament news cycle. Maybe I haven’t been paying close enough attention.
Shawn in Showme
Love the visual. I have to add to this to a sig file somewhere.
Leelee for Obama
@Libby: This is a good maxim. I will adopt it if you don’t mind sharing-these days it’s really polite to ask. I’d hate to borrow your last maxim! LOL
My Scotch-Irish parents used to say expect the worst. If it comes, you’re not surprised, if it doesn’t, have a party!
Leelee for Obama
@Shawn in Showme:
In my mind’s ear, I heard the black guy in Superman saying "That’s a bad mother….!"
Lupin
Should we blame Scott Beauchamp?
Comrade Dread
This is good news for John McCain.
All joking aside, yeah, this is going to get worse. We’re seeing a major contraction in GDP around the world and it’s going to cause a lot of pain.
The government (mostly the Bush administration) and the Fed have been trying to put off a contraction for as long as they could via an artificially easy money policy and running deficits when they should have been balancing their books. So it’s much worse than it would have been.
Throw in 10-12 years of an appalling lack of oversight by the government (including the regulatory agencies tasked to oversee financial transactions), and Congress being obedient lapdogs, and we’re truly screwed.
Next to hit: pensions or entitlements (thanks again to the government using the yearly surplus to keep deficits lower.)
Worst case scenario that could happen would be if China opts to take the pain of losing a lot of money by dumping our bonds rather than continue to sink money into an economic Titanic.
Bootlegger
@TheFountainHead:
I got such good advice on the corn in our dog food from Juicers that I ordered two Fruminators today, one 1.75 for the cat and a 4 inch for the dog.
I hear the good people of SCarolina are a little pissed at their Guvnah. Even Lindsey is pleading with Sanford to take the money. Teacher layoffs, college classes cancelled, but as long as he can cling to those principles…..
What? Those principles don’t include education and feeding the unemployed? Sound like some worthless principles to me.
Of course my Kentucky took the stimulus, and hired a basketball coach for $35 million. Nobody hear agrees with me that this is as bad as the AIG bonuses. Strange.
SimplyOn
What ** Atanarjuat ** states is exactly what the Republicans are depending on to win in the next election cycle, or two, or three. I was talking to my wife last night about this. Republicans have no desire to do anything constructive. They are depending on the economy continuing to decline in order to win seats back, and do not give a damn about the country. All they care about is the party and keeping people in the party in office, not actually doing anything to help the country. They will continue to try and stop every constructive proposal even if it makes perfect sense to implement. They have nothing to offer in response other than to say no, and of course more tax cuts needed. My wife became disheartened.
Republicans are offering nothing right now.
Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse
Waitwaitwait — I know that college basketball is a big deal, taking up prime time and all every spring, but COLLEGE coaches actually get paid that much in the States? Jesus Tapdancing Christ.
Is there actually any way a good college basketball team pulls in enough revenue for the school to justify that?
Zifnab
@Robin G.:
I think Sanford is turning down tax dollars for education that amount to roughly $700 million of his state’s $2.8 billion (roughly 25%). Perry is rejecting unemployment dollars to the tune of $555 million out of his state’s $17 billion (a mere 3%).
A lot of the incoming stimulus comes in the form of the $70 billion update to AMT and the $400 per capita tax credit. And for a state budget – even a state as big as Texas – $555 million is nothing to sneeze at.
Leelee for Obama
@iluvsummr: This sound plausible. How sad it that?
Bootlegger
@** Atanarjuat **: Bootie call Attanut!
You are very good at coming here and spitting out whatever cum got dumped in your mouth this morning, but we know schlock juice when we see it.
Thanks for the show.
BenA
@Bootlegger:
Nobody agrees because the actual state of Kentucky isn’t exactly paying his salary. Kentucky basketball probably makes something in the neighborhood of $20mil a year… plus I’m sure big donners are making up a lot of the difference… now if you want to argue that large state universities should be in the business of sports entertainment and fielding semi-pro sports teams… well that’s a worthy argument… or that Kentucky is overpaying for a guy who’s won exactly nothing of note at Memphis and UMass… that is one too… but trying to connect stimulus dollars to Calapari’s salary… that’s a straw man of the highest order.
Leelee for Obama
I have to guess most people in Kentucky drink the water unfiltered? That way lies all kinds of not too bright!
The Moar You Know
@Gus: What, the economy is bad? All I know from the media is who got booted from Dancing With The Stars and some coverage about this crazy bitch who had eight babies.
Are you sure about this economy thing?
Bootlegger
@Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse:
Absolutely not. They shuck and jive with the numbers, argue that all those fans (supporters) spend money partying and going to games and then count that money as "money in". But even at that I doubt it approaches what they pay for the coach, the facilities, recruitment, and "student" remediation so the players stay eligible long enough to hit one more jumper. Furthermore, this model of economic development is absurd. Partying as economic development? Why not invest it instead in locally produced goods or buying the services of local craftsmen as opposed to paying minimum wage to sweep stadiums or sell soda and chips to fans on game day.
The Moar You Know
@Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse: Two words: Alumni endowments.
It can pay better than looting the United States Treasury.
jibeaux
Here in NC, we really, really, really do not care for this.
gwangung
Actually, it could.
Speaking as a fundraiser at a major Division I university, basketball could do that. Generally, it’s football that’s the number one revenue generator, but the various tourneys and the Big Dance and other sources make basketball a strong number two and in some cases, number one. (Sports boosters and all….)
AkaDad
I’m glad Obama is overseas and not here screwing up the economy more. Wall St. clearly agrees with me, since the market is up 200 + points.
Bootlegger
@BenA: Hardly. $400,000 per year is coming straight from the state’s education budget, a budget that was just cut by the legislature, but would have been cut deeper if not for the funding cuts.
Don’t drink the koolaid man, school sports do not pay for themselves, they are a net drain on the taxpayer, and that is exactly who is 1) footing the bill for the stimulus, and 2) the stimulus is suppose to help. To pay a freakin’ sports coach that kind of money, in this climate, is nothing short of a crime.
jibeaux
@The Moar You Know:
Yup. UNC men’s basketball is definitely financially favorable to the university. Inquire as to the donation requirements for the privilege of buying tickets, if you like.
Bootlegger
@The Moar You Know:
This is a much abused argument, that alumni only give because the sports team gives ’em a chubby. I see no reason to believe this is true. So I’m a gazzillionaire with two choices, endow a new building on campus and take the tax breaks or not. "Hey, did you see they hired a new basketball coach. My money is buying the building now for sure."
Certainly Universities argue this but I’ve yet to see one credible analysis that sports are a net revenue producer for the state.
SimplyOn
@jibeaux: Please try to speak for yourself, and do not project onto the rest of us in NC.
@AkaDad: Oh, that cause and effect scenario makes perfect sense. Trtrtrtroll.
harlana pepper
Let me just say this (and I live in SC and am looking for a job right now – I haven’t had a job that pays benefits for 4 fucking years and my medical insurance is through the roof), I do not want to hear *ONE MORE WORD* about deficit spending from republicans who were running the show for EIGHT FUCKING YEARS, FUCK YOU AND SUCK MY LEFT TIT, you diaper-wearing, bathroom-scoping, glory-hole fucking, pedophilic LYING SACKS OF SHIT!!! Why in the fuck would ANYBODY listen to you? SHUT UP, SHUT THE FUCK UP about the Dem budget — you have failed, you are completely discredited, you have nothing, NOTHING, to offer but the same shit that got us to where we are now, you CREATED a massive deficit and now you want to piss and moan about it??!! — crawl under a rock and suck your binkie or each others’ dicks or assholes or whatever sick shit you are into, for the next 40 years!
Bootlegger
@gwangung: But the money going out, and the opportunity costs of not investing that money in more productive economic development cannot equal what they bring in.
BenA
@Bootlegger:
I’m not going to argue that paying that kind of money for Calapari in this climate is pure hubris and foolishness for the storied Kentucky basketball team, because it’s absolute idiocy to pay that kind of money… but we’ll just agree to disagree that basketball and football teams don’t pay for themselves at large state Universities.
Hyperion
@wasabi gasp:
this sounds a little like the plot of "Outsourced".
except your girlfriend’s dad is sent to india to train folks.
an interesting counterpoint to "Slumdog" IMO.
BenA
@Bootlegger:
I’ll also note the fact that you say "sports"… Obviously you don’t see any value in the non-revenue producing women’s sports either… like gymnastics or swimming… because those would go away completely as well… those really drain the University sports budget at a far greater rate than football, basketball, and to some extent hockey.
gwangung
@Bootlegger:
I’m not arguing that it is (and, in fact, most fundraisers would prefer that money go to academic endeavors). But, generally, sports donors and academic donors are skew sets (at best, very little overlap). Get rid of the sports teams at colleges, and the money isn’t going to go to academic causes (it’ll probably go to other sports-related things).
Bootlegger
@BenA: Fair enough. Without real numbers we can’t really debate it anyhow.
I know the schools put out numbers of what comes in but they’re accounting is similar to how industry does it and never fairly estimates the costs to the state. My wife’s research firm is producing a report on "The True Cost of Coal" that uses the coal companies’ methodology and multipliers, but takes a more comprehensive look at what the taxpayers, through the state, county and cities, pay for having the coal industry. Bottom line, the taxpayer is in the red.
I suspect you’d find something similar with sports. A lot of cash flows by and they say "look, money coming in!", and everyone ooohs and aahhhs. But if you consider all the actual expenses, opportunity costs and externalities I’d be surprised if an industry that essentially doesn’t produce anything tangible, doesn’t add value to anything, actually was a net benefit to the people.
jibeaux
@SimplyOn:
Dude, unless you’re a transplant from SC, it is a well known and accepted fact that we are superior in every and all ways to SC, from barbecue to basketball to not flying a confederate flag to having governors who accept stimulus money. Comparisons are pointless.
Bootlegger
@BenA: Don’t be absurd, of course there is value for those sports. But lots of schools have those sports without the Big Brother Revenue Generator to give ’em a hand out.
Hyperion
@Bootlegger:
if he doesn’t win, i’m sure we’ll hear lots of outrage.
remember…gotta fail first to get the outrage.
and gotta be using taxpayer $.
a rather notable difference, doncha think?
or are you just blathering on in typical B-J fashion?
if so, never mind.
edit: i see BenA got in before me.
jibeaux
Except for, of course, SC has harlana pepper, who is clearly a fan of a most terrific movie and also has a real gift for a language.
Bootlegger
@gwangung: Ok, sure. So they donate money to sports. But if the team hired a less expensive coach would they donate less money to sports? If so, then no problem because you don’t have to pay the coach. Maybe they’ll go and give it to women’s soccer or men’s wrestling instead. Or maybe a local youth sports organization. Big Time College Sports is not the only fundraising model.
Leelee for Obama
@harlana pepper:
Man, harlana, that was so good, I’m gonna have me an extra smoke! Thanx
harlana pepper
Why thank you, jibeaux! :)
Guess you can tell I’m a tad peeved this morning – not my most creative commenting endeavor but I think I made my point ;)
BenA
@Bootlegger:
I’m with you in a lot of respects but maybe my own experience with the University of Connecticut is coloring my thinking. In 1986 the University was in shambles…. in 2009 it’s the premiere public University in New England…. the state of Connecticut put $2 billion into the University…. most of that went to things other than sports… and I feel it is 95% attributable to the success of the men’s and woman’s basketball team. There’s no way the state legislature would have funded the University at that rate if it wasn’t for the success of the basketball teams, and the HUGE popularity they have in the state. (Men’s and Women’s, oddly enough more women’s IMHO)
Now if you want to argue that that’s not how we should decide to fund our institutions of higher learning… than I agree with you 100%… and that this is an extraordinary circumstance… but college athletics has been nothing but a net positive for the state of Connecticut.
Bootlegger
@Hyperion: Blathering? Sure. What else would I be doing here.
Though I have a bee in my bonnet over this because everyone around me the last two weeks has had the glazed look in their eyes as they drool over who the next coach of Big Blue will be. They didn’t even flinch at the money, "nuthin’s too good for Cat Nation." We’re talking nearly 1/3 of my university’s annual budget (I’m not UK). They are cutting spending across the board in education. The only reason its not worse is because our governor took the stimulus money. The UK president actually said its a psychological thing, that to get through these tough times we need the most expensive coach in college basketball history.
Well I’m calling bullshit.
harlana pepper
Leelee, i still want one right now :)
BenA
@Bootlegger:
That’s true, but they aren’t as big. They don’t produce Olympic atheletes, don’t have the facilities that large state Universities have, and they don’t have anywhere near the travel costs associated with the larger programs because they tend compete against the other smaller institutions near them.
Bootlegger
@BenA: I see your point, though I would argue that the net positive is the legislature’s investment in the University, not the sports. If it was the sports that led to that funding increase what do you think will happen when the programs have some down years? It’s built on a house of cards, no better than the derivative economy we just sank.
Moreover, just because the school raised its profile, does not mean that the money spent by the taxpayer on those sports is paying off like an investment in real industry would.
Leelee for Obama
@harlana pepper:
I liked your first post better. It was from the heart!!!!!
Bootlegger
@BenA: Northwestern? Stanford? Private schools yes, but they have a model that works. Texas Tech funded all those sports years before Bobby Knight or Mike Leach set foot on the Llano Estacado. The University of Mississippi and Mississippi State don’t spend money on those teams like Kentucky does and they fully fund all those sports.
gwangung
@Bootlegger:
Nah, it just wouldn’t be coming in at all. And where it’d go wouldn’t be to local sports; it’d be big and splashy, like pro sports, if they could manage it (they’d be doing something foolish like convincing the local government to build a sports stadium on the taxpayer’s dime; in a lot of ways, it’s better to have them focus on the university level–easier to make them pay for everything).
SimplyOn
@jibeaux
Sorry, misconstrued your intention. I agree with everything you have said.
GambitRF
The number of people filing initial claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week, while those filing continuing claims hit an all-time high for the 10th straight week, according to a government report released Thursday.
Yahoo Finance:
Wall Street is extending its rally as it grows more optimistic that the economy is on the mend.
Dow: +3.5%
Uh… something would seem to be missing here…
gwangung
@Bootlegger:
Um, dude, they use the same model as their competitors in Div I sports, like UCLA, Arizona State, etc….Football and basketball are the generators to fund the other sports…
gwangung
@GambitRF: Frigging clowns on Wall Street have been missing clues for the last two decades….
jibeaux
@SimplyOn:
Sure. Also, I declare it a B-J Official Internet Tradition Of Which I Am Aware to make sweeping, overgeneralized, overstated, arrogant pronouncements.
Bootlegger
@gwangung:
They do this anyway! While I was teaching at Auburn they built a shiny new baseball park, redecorated Jordan-Hare stadium and started work on the new arena. It was hailed as a "private-public partnership", meaning my tax dollars. There was nothing wrong with the old stadiums other than the look of them. Oh, and no similar building program for the women’s sports. In fact, with exceptions like UConn and Tennessee women’s basketball, all of that donor money goes in a big way toward traditional men’s sports. Another way they skirt Title IX.
jcricket
Three things:
1) Clearly this is good news for John McCain. Just had to get that out of the way.
2) How can this be bad news? The stock market went up, and the stock market is the economy, so there must be something wrong with the UI numbers! :-)
3) If the Democrats don’t hammer the stimulus package opposition when running against the Republicans in 2010 they are giant fools. Esp. people like Sanford, who are rejecting unemployment insurance. Or Palin, rejecting aid for teachers/education. The ads practically write themselves.
JohnR
And as we fall past the 70th floor, we say "Well, so far, it hasn’t been as bad as I feared. I think things are looking up!"
4tehlulz
@GambitRF: Wall Street is disconnected from reality? WHOCOULDANODE?
Hyperion
@Bootlegger: i completely agree with you about the idiocy of the religion of college sports. i’m a UF grad and the gator success in Div I sports has not improved the academic side one whit IMO.
that a land grant university is so committed to big-time athletics and big-time research really pisses me off. their primary mission is to educate the citizens of the state.
evidently UF has been told to cut 10% (a surprisingly small number given the budget deficit and the size of university budget cuts here in WA). they are considering killing the geology program. a state that depends on phosphate mining seems to think that eliminating the geology dept is a good idea. sheesh.
harlana pepper
Just fyi on the SC stim:
"Representative James Clyburn, Democrat of South Carolina and the House majority whip, insisted on a passage in the law that includes this caveat:
If funds provided to any state in any division of this act are not accepted for use by the governor, then acceptance by the state legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such state."
NYT 3/13/09
Position of the republican-dominated SC legislature which is Sanford can suck dick, too – we want to get re-elected.
Bootlegger
@gwangung: But they don’t pay the same ridiculous salaries now do they? Stanford’s football coach is 68th, Northwestern’s is 76th. (I can’t find similar data for basketball)
So obviously they can fund all kinds of quality "non-revenue" sports without breaking the school’s bank.
Leelee for Obama
Come the Rapture, there will be no need for geologists, dontchaknow!? Also.
Bootlegger
@Hyperion: Yes, exactly. These are the kinds of externalities that never factor in to the calculations of whether or not Big Time College Sports actually make any money for the schools. If they don’t improve the core mission of the college or university, and actually detract from it, then what is their utility to the taxpayer and/or the students?
I’ll tell you, the economic development that comes from buying big foam fingers, getting drunk and screaming "Go Cats/Gators!" Hardly what I’d call economic development (though I will admit, lots of fun).
Comrade Darkness
@** Atanarjuat **, whoever is doing atanjar right now lacks a certain subtly. Tone down the coherence and make it less driven. it needs an edge of petulance too.
Not that I don’t appreciate someone running interference, mind you.
gwangung
@Bootlegger: Hey, I’m not arguing against your basic stance. I’m just saying that the way Stanford and Northwestern run their athletic departments is pretty much the same as for any state-funded school–football and basketball supports all the other "minor" sports. And that the money coming in from boosters isn’t going to go anywhere except big time sports.
gex
@MattF: Oh, so that’s what Sully means when he yammers on and on about entitlement cuts! There’s just that slight undercurrent of "surplus population" in there.
gnomedad
@** Atanarjuat **:
Better watch your wingnut meme density there or your post will collapse into a black hole.
Brachiator
@iluvsummr:
To paraphrase the great reporter and author, Randy Shilts: A Depression is certainly character-building. It’s made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I’d rather have a lot more jobs and a little less character.
Brian J
What about 2012? It’s unclear if the sharp increase in numbers for Obama in states like Texas, South Carolina, and Alaska was due to any one particular factor, but assuming it doesn’t vanish and Obama runs the same sort of impressive operation that he ran this time, could he take those states? If the economy isn’t weighing him down like an anchor on a fashion model, he’ll be able to take credit for the turnaround, and he can slam those who opposed it.
Church Lady
@Bootlegger:
Given what I do know about the situation with Calipari, the salary is not quite as obscene as it seems. First, for those not quite as up on all of this as Bootlegger and I are (from diametrically opposed positions), the $35+M is over an eight year period. Yeah, it’s a lot of money, but to leave Memphis, Cal also gave up a lot of money. He lost a $2.5M annuity that would have paid out next year (funded by donors, not the University of Memphis) and a $5M retention bonus that would have paid out after the 2012 season. Most of the salary money, from either school, comes from donors, not from the Universities budgets. He also didn’t leave for the money – Memphis donors offered him a whole lot more to stay. He left because it was Kentucky, pure and simple.
What I do know is that Kentucky is damn lucky to get him and that Memphis fans are crushed that he’s leaving. When he arrived here, a once storied program was on the skids and he bought it back to glory. Before he arrived, Memphis was lucky to have 8K fans in the stands for any given game. Now, FedEx Forum is sold out for every home game, with more than 18K butts in the seats, around 20 times per year, paying top dollar for the priviledge. Donations to the University are way up too, with most of that money going to academic endeavors. A program that wins like ours did over the last five or six years also brings in a boatload of television revenue to the University.
Long and short of it – yeah, he makes a whole lot of money, but he’s worth it and probably covers most, if not all, of it with enhanced revenues to the University. He also does great work with kids in the community and his involvement with different non-profit programs helps to drive additional funding to those programs. We’ll miss him here in Memphis.
** Atanarjuat **
@Leelee for Obama:
Speaking of colossal failures, LeeLee, President Porkularity blundered spectacularly once again with foreign relations. First it was the Region 1 DVD’s he gave the British Prime Minister (who lives in a Region 2 country), and now it’s a lame iPod stuffed with Obama’s coma-inducing speeches that he stupidly gifted to the Queen of England.
Since he obviously can’t manage something as simple as giving appropriate gifts to heads of states, I’m not that confident he can do anything meaningful to turn the economy around. In fact, Obama’s only succeeded in sinking the fortunes of the nation even further, as the recent job loss report manifestly demonstrates.
-A
Gordon, The Big Express Engine
If someone has a credible study they can link to about the impact of big-time D-1 sports like football and men’ basketball on a university’s finances, I would like to see it.
Absent that, we are just spinning our wheels with this discussion. I went to UT Austin for grad school at the beginning of the Mack Brown era and based on my unscientific observations, I conclude that the overall effect has been positive. A ridiculous amount of money has poured into that place because of him in the past decade.
Also, I would guess that at a place the size of UT, arguing about the athletic budget is sort of missing the forest for the trees.
I would grant though that on the margins, a few extra dollars into the athletic budget at the expense of the geology dept., to use the example above, is bad long-term for the university.
Bootlegger
@gwangung: Sure, ok, can’t argue with that .
Bootlegger
@Church Lady: You can have him back. He is $400k per year on the state’s books, making him the highest paid employee in the state.
Your economic development argument assumes that the money sent in to the program would not have been spent in another fashion if not "invested" in basketball. This is a fundamentally flawed assumption and I argue the "investment" in basketball creates opportunity costs for other things in which money could have been better invested. Those stadium jobs are seasonal and don’t pay much above minimum wage, further depressing the local labor force. Basketball is not a value-added industry, it doesn’t produce anything, and as such is not sound economic development.
Finally, there are externalities. The cost of cleaning up neighborhoods after a football orgy, the costs in wasted electricity for stadium lights, or water, and so on. But the biggest externality is to the school itself. I’ve been involved with large state universities for most of my adult life and I’ve yet to see one dime filter into one of the academic programs with which I am associated. I do, however, have to "help" student/athletes who can barely read and write so they can remain eligible for the Big Game or the Title. I’ve also seen academic budgets slashed while sports budgets go up, as they are right now at UK.
Leelee for Obama
@** Atanarjuat **: Now I may be more convinced you’re a spoof, though not entirely.
Thanks for the spelling of colossal. I knew it looked wrong, and have given my Funk & Wagnall’s to my Granddaughters, so I didn’t look it up!
Bootlegger
@** Atanarjuat **: Gee, I heard a reporter from the Guardian say the Queen very much enjoyed the gift and was quite charmed by Ms. Obama.
Suck it Attanut!
Mary
@Bootlegger:
I live in a college town, and there is more to it than beer sales on game day. When we have games, especially the big ones, almost every business benefits. That’s why we get so loud when people start talking about moving games to a neutral town. They stay in our hotels, buy from our local merchants, eat at our restaurants, buy gas, etc. I’ve heard a local business owner lament low sales on game day because she counts on it to ease the red ink.
jeffreyw
@harlana pepper:
Now there’s the flea we all love and adore! lol
robertdsc
She is magnetic, that’s for sure. There’s no Palin-esque starbursts for me, but only a smile at how elegant the First Lady is. Ooh la la.
Bootlegger
@Mary: No doubt, and the money "invested" in your town is money not "invested" somewhere else. Moreover, who pays for the costs of the extra traffic in town? The out-of-towners to some extent, but does it equal what the city takes in? What about the productivity of people who don’t get revenue from the game? In Auburn you couldn’t work on game day, it sucked to leave the house, so you’re pretty much locked in while your "guests" trash the place.
I understand that there is lots of money involved, but its delusional to think that this is a net gain, economically speaking, for the people of . Nothing is produced and the only added value is a few hours of consumer escapism.
Church Lady
@Bootlegger: What I do know is that the basketball program at the University of Memphis pays the freight not only for itself, but also covers the much of the costs for every other sport at the school. Every other sport, including football, loses money. Now, if you want to argue that the school could get along without any sports, as part of its core mission of education, I won’t argue with you. But, as long as a school has athletics for men and women, having at least one sport that produces massive revenue streams and covers the losses of all of the others is a good thing.
I will ague on your point that the money sent into the program could have been spent elsewhere, if not invested in basketball. That is a specious arguement, given that most of the money given by donors for the basketball program would not have been given at all, if the basketball program didn’t exist. Most of them give to the school BECAUSE of the basketball program and its winning record. Winning programs generate a lot more donations, and paid revenue as well, than losing programs. That is the only reason Universities are willing to pay huge coaching salaries for winning and are so quick to fire losing coaches. Winning football and basketball programs generate enormous revenue streams, good publicity for the school and help to goose donations, all of which filter down into the academic programs. The day any academic can pull the same number of dollars into a school’s coffers that a winning basketball or football coach can is the day that academic salaries will skyrocket.
Brachiator
@** Atanarjuat **:
Wow! A spoofer and making stuff up. Yeah, the Region 1 thing was a gaffe, but even babies in England and America have All Region DVD players.
The iPod is stuffed with music and with pictures and videos of the Queens travels in the US, including a meeting with Dubya, which probaly was coma-inducing, and stupefying as well.
This crap, even with the lies and distortions, is an official GOP talking point. Sean Hannity, for example, has been beating it to death. Also, just as a point of information, a lot of Sean Hannity’s material is ghost written by another conservative media hack, radio goon Mark Levin (this is an open secret in the radio business).
Bootlegger
@Church Lady: There are plenty of schools with Big-Time non-revenue sports that don’t overpay their coaches, Stanford and Northwestern, all the Ivies, for example. Sorry, but your argument is specious. Just because some schools fund their non-revenue sports this way, it doesn’t follow that schools *must* fund their sports this way.
Also, I didn’t say the donors would put it somewhere else in the university, just that they would put it somewhere else, perhaps investing it in industries that crate real jobs.
I know there’s big money involved, its what makes everyone look at the hand with the shiny coin rather than the one reaching into your pocket.
As someone noted above, we don’t have good data on this and there is a reason for this, no one with access to the real data wants to know. But given that sports, in my experience, do little and actually harm the college or university’s core mission, given what I estimate the costs are including the opportunity costs and externalities, and given that nothing of durable value is produced, you’ll have a hard time convincing me that paying Calipari $35 million is "good for Kentucky".
gwangung
Just to point out to you that I, as a fundraiser for a major university, know that as a rule, athletic donations are for athletics only. They don’t overlap with academic donations as a rule. It’s pretty much a push with respect to the school. And these donations could go elsewhere, but would generally stay in some sort of sports economy.
I think sports boosters overestimate the impact that sports have on an overall economy. Sure, they give boosts to secondary businesses like restaurants, logo manufacturers, service businesses, etc—but they suck up that boost because of the large salaries (concentration in fewer hands), tax breaks, etc. The good is much more modest than people give credit to.
** Atanarjuat **
@Leelee for Obama:
And thank you for the not-so-clever dodging of the points I made.
But since you are "for" Obama, avoiding anything that makes The Great Teleprompter…er, the President look bad is evidently par for the course.
-A
Cris
You made points? That’s new.
** Atanarjuat **
@Brachiator:
"making stuff up," Brackish? ABC’s Jake Tapper begs to differ:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/04/what-does-one-g.html
Photos from the Queen’s 2007 White House State Visit
Photos from the Queen’s 2007 Jamestown, Va., Visit
Photos from the Queen’s 2007 Richmond, Va., Visit
Video from the Queen’s 1957 Jamestown Visit
Video from the Queen’s 2007 Jamestown Visit
Video from the Queen’s 2007 Richmond Visit
Photos from President Obama’s Inauguration
Audio of then-state senator Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, and
Audio of President Obama 2009 Inauguration Address
So, you were saying?
Sorry, Brackish — your knee-jerk anti-conservatism slip is showing.
-A
Brachiator
@** Atanarjuat **:
Yep. You got it. The Obamas are really looking bad. Rank amateurs in the public sphere. Here’s some of the latest evidence (Michelle Obama fever hits the UK):
Wait a minute. That was too positive. Let’s try this one:
Oh, snap! Michelle is winning over the Brits again. One last time:
Ah, I think I can hear the sounds of wingnut heads exploding.
Oh, yeah, and as for your making things up, I note that I had to make you be honest and note that the iPod contains much more than Obama speeches.
HyperIon
regarding huge salaries for coaches, at least this is a conversation that happens in public BEFORE massive amounts of money are expended. that is another way that the issue differs from high CEO pay.
those fucking Boards of Directors (who are likewise on the take and need to get their comeuppance as well…i mean, what do they do besides suck out resources either for their worthless asses or the CEO’s worthless ass) work pretty much out of the view of the public.
isn’t the whole package for calipari a matter of public record?
Bootlegger
@** Atanarjuat **: You made a point Attanut? All I saw was drool on your chin. Perhaps you could enlighten us without all the spittle flying from your foaming mouth.
Bootlegger
@HyperIon: True, to a point. The negotiations were not "public", only the result. So the discussion is post facto, but there is one–which is half-better than CEOs and their Boards.
Leelee for Obama
@Cris:
Thanks for covering for me, I was otherwise occupied.
Atan, if the kinds of approval numbers the Obamas are racking up continue, I can see how he’ll be unable to secure re-election! Who could possibly want a President that accomplishes important tasks and makes the rest of the world want to be his new BFF?
** Atanarjuat **
@Brachiator:
Brackish, when I stated that the lame iPod that Obama gifted the Queen was stuffed with his coma-inducing speeches, you had responded with the following:
And then, when I listed some of the items on the iPod, as per Jake Tapper’s ABC blog, you now respond with this:
Goddamn, you’re a dishonest, slippery eel. I never said that the iPod only had Obama’s speeches, I said it was "stuffed" with ’em. However, if your reading mistake is not intentional, and you’re having trouble making the distinction, then I feel very badly for you. Perhaps you could slow down and not let your knee jerk so quickly. It will save you a ton of embarrassment in the future.
As for the rest of that pro-Obama love letter you adoringly wrote, you just wasted everyone’s time. You see, I was referring LeeLee to comment #89. Your own use of the scripted events during Obama’s visit with the Queen is hardly a stalwart defense of his awkward gift-giving abilities.
Nice try, though.
-A
Bootlegger
@gwangung:
Factor in opportunity costs and externalities and I argue the needle swings from "modest good" to "ass-raping the taxpayer". (yeah, yeah, that’s hyperbole, but it felt good to type it)
Bootlegger
@** Atanarjuat **:
Really? You’re the one parsing the meaning of "stuffed", implying that it doesn’t mean "full".
And your claim that Obama’s speeches are "coma-inducing" is, at the very least subjective, and given the popularity of those speeches you’re the one being at least disingenuous.
Please, do me next. I love bitch-slappin’ you and you never play with me anymore. I miss you.
d0n Camillo
Atanarjuat,
Maybe you’re right and President Obama isn’t the greatest gift giver we could have. That’s not why we elected him. If he can get us out of the economic mess we are in I don’t care if he gives away DVDs of himself and Michelle having sex in the Lincoln bedroom.
Mike in NC
Ideally, they’d like for us to segue from depression to world war. It worked out pretty well for the business interests last time. Who’ll it be: Iran or China? Probably Iran since the Chinese could only drive our economy even further into the ground any time they chose.
Brachiator
@** Atanarjuat **:
*Yawn*
Res ipsa loquitur, baby. Res ipsa loquitur.
Truth is, I don’t care much about the gift-giving rituals one way or another. Nor does anyone else.
What I find amusing is the Official GOP Talking Points about Obama’s gift giving. The fear and trembling, and the sickness unto death of those whose Obama-dread makes the former Hillary Haters look almost sane, is truly breathtaking.
Let’s take a moment here. The Queen gives the Obamas a picture of herself, and this is — what? — the essence of a well-chosen gift in the eyes of the GOP goon squad. But an iPod full of stuff — including show tunes and opera music that reportedly the Queen enjoys is an awkward gift?
I’m enjoying teh stoopid here. But I don’t take your comments seriously. Not for a nanosecond.
Oh, yeah, and about the Obamas and "scripted events. Here’s a little something extra courtesy of Jake the Tapster (First Lady Sparks Frenzy At London All-Girls School) .
Who caused all the shrieking at the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Language School in London today?
A surprise visit from English soccer star David Beckham? Pop boy band, the Jonas Brothers?
No, that was First Lady Michelle Obama sparking a frenzy at the all-girls school, where she spoke about the importance of education, explained why being smart is cool and even shared a little girl talk about her courtship with her husband, President Obama….
After her remarks, Mrs. Obama greeted the choir girls and gave them each a hug and was mobbed by students seated in the audience as she made her way to greet them. Throughout her visit, the girls cheered and clapped loudly for her and many wiped away tears.
Earlier the students buzzed with anticipation for the special surprise guest they were expecting. Not surprising, the rumor mill was in overdrive and many of the students thought it could be Mrs. Obama coming. The students let out a cheer and squeals when she finally arrived.
auntieeminaz
@** Atanarjuat **:
Your nitpicking about gift giving seems 1000x more ridiculous when contrasted with his performance at the news conference at the G20 summit currently being broadcast on TV. Even without the unavoidable comparison to our previous fearless leader he is impressive.
BTW, his speech was given without a teleprompter.
harlana pepper
jeffreyw: she’s not dead yet :)
** Atanarjuat **
@Brachiator:
Now that was very moving, Brackish. I can just imagine how wildly you clapped your shiny flippers until they were raw. Arf! Arf! Arf!
I must say, the Obama P.R. flack who actually wrote that piece and pushed it through the liberal media as news truly earned their pay for the week. I’m impressed.
-A
The Populist
I know you are a tool and a troll but you are wrong yet again.
Do nothing as you freaks propose and I guarantee you livelihoods will be wrecked for at least a generation.
Idiot.
The Populist
But Bush NEVER, EVER staged any PR events (flight suit..cough). Yep…clueless.
Brachiator
@** Atanarjuat **:
There are still some Internet Traditions that I am learning.
The stuff you write is so pointlessly juvenile, so ideologically stunted, and so easily deflected that I must wonder if someone pays you to try to generate phony controversies. I mean, it’s not even good spoof, because it is so content-free that you can’t really get a conversational back-and-forth going.
For example, you originally cite Jake Tapper in your feeble attempt to rationalize your comments about Obama’s iPod gift to the Queen. But now you want to dismiss him as Obama’s tool for reporting about Michelle Obama’s school visit.
Do you really expect to be taken seriously? Is there really some wingnut discussion board where this kind of inanity is accepted as rational discourse?
You do understand that no one cares, don’t you?
For example, I only reference your stuff to correct the record for the sake of other posters here. I do take some interest in your deliberate rhetorical distortions, but your stuff is so predictable that it doesn’t have as much entertainment value as you think it does.
But hey, thanks for playing.
The Populist
Hey rightie shill morons,
The queen specifically REQUESTED the damn Ipod. Go fuck yourselves with that fake budget you guys are so high on okay?
If the Queen wants a marvel of American ingenuity (it is) then she gets that marvel of American ingenuity.
Why can’t you asshats be happy and see this as a good thing for fucking once. Sheesh you people are hateful, spiteful little trolls.
The Populist
Brachiator,
Atawhatshisname is a troll. At least that’s what I am told by a lot of the long time posters here. I think we need to respond and tell him (them) how wrong their point of view is but in the end, he will only try to get personal with you.
The Populist
You know what I can’t wait for? The day these asshats extremist righties are on the outside looking in, talking about revolutions and whining about why Americans won’t listen to them anymore. That day is coming and it will be fucking awesome.
Fact: The Whigs used to be a party once. So will the Republicans.
Brachiator
@The Populist:
Thanks. Good points. The thing is, I never take this stuff personally, so he is just wasting his time.
** Atanarjuat **
@Brachiator:
Brackish, I see you failed (rather colossally) to comprehend one of my points.
You said:
Which was in response to this:
Now, pay attention, Brackish, because this is going to be on the final exam.
Notice that I used the word, "actually?" This means that I don’t believe that Tapper wrote that Obama-stroking fluff piece you so lovingly referenced. The author is the "P.R. flack" I mentioned. If this is still confusing to you, or if you are so naive as to never having witnessed White House propaganda filtered through media outlets, then the next few years of the Obama administration will be a real eye opener for you.
And finally:
What an incredibly wonderful opinion you have of yourself, Brackish. Shilling feverishly for President Obama is just a public service you perform on Balloon-Juice — oh, but of course!
Don’t break your arm patting yourself on the back, my sad and deluded friend.
-A
** Atanarjuat **
@The Populist:
Oh, I love this!
Populist lectures thusly:
Right! Because Populist never gets personal at all.
I’m so glad that you’ve kept the dialogue so civil and impersonal, Populist. It would be just so awful if you were to get all personal and rude and stuff.
Thanks for the good laugh, my oh-so-courteous friend. :-D
-A
JWW
The real ? is how many of them don’t want a job? If you want a job I can find you one in 8 hours or less. Do you really want to work when you can watch TV all day at home and know the check is in the mail.