Making sense of the numbers. OC Journalists’ Roundtable. Money in college sports: Is it time to get rid of amateur status? Forget about Mad Men – it’s mean men (and women) who are rolling in the dough.
Making sense of the numbers
A flood of data on the country’s key economic indicators has been leading the news this week: home sales, mortgage rates, consumer prices, unemployment figures and, of course, the stock market. All with remarkable changes. Sales of previously-owned homes dropped 3.5% in July – the lowest number all year – and far below what economists say must be sold to prime a healthy economy. It's surprising when you consider mortgage rates. The average rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage is now at its lowest level since 1971, at 4.15%. Yet, few Americans can take advantage of the record-low rates. While some have rushed to refinance, banks are denying more people without exceptional credit scores or high equity. As for the ever-shifting unemployment applications, that number rose back above 400,000 last week. However, the more reliable indicator, the four-week average, fell to the lowest level since mid-April. Finally, the consumer price index rose 0.5% in July. Year over year, the cost of everything from fuel to food to clothing has pushed up 3.6%. As for the stock market, well just wait a minute and it promises to bounce. How are all these changes affecting you? Are you one of the statistics: desperate to refinance, hesitating to buy a home, or applying for unemployment? Are all of these numbers a dark cloud over our economic future, or is there a silver lining? What are the forecasts going forward?
Guests:
John Karevoll, Analyst, DataQuick Information Systems, a real estate information company in Southern California
Chris Thornberg, Principal, Beacon Economics
OC Journalists’ Roundtable
Larry and our talented trio of Orange County journalists riff on the latest news from the OC including an update in the Kelly Thomas case, the local backlash against the Secure Communities initiative, the effect of new redistricting maps on OC political districts, and growing pressure to appoint a citizens oversight committee to deal with the Orange County Fairgrounds.
Guests:
Gustavo Arellano, managing editor of the OC Weekly
Norberto Santana, editor-in-chief of the Voice of OC, a non-profit investigative news agency that covers Orange County government and politics.
Chris Knap, Editor of Government, Politics and Investigations at the Orange County Register
Money in college sports: is it time to get rid of amateur status?
The rash of recent money scandals involving college football and basketball athletes and athletic programs is challenging the core ethics of the NCAA. That association clings adamantly to the amateur status of college athletic programs. The latest alleged scandal at the University of Miami is mind boggling in its scope. Nevin Shapiro, who is in jail on a Ponzi scheme charge has admitted to supplying prostitutes, money, jewelry, clothing, travel, and yacht rides (among other things) to Miami athletes and also claims that several Miami assistant coaches were aware of these gifts. This is just the most egregious example in a long line of scandals not he least of which is the violations involving USC running back Reggie Bush. The NCAA leadership is well aware of the problem and in the USC case the then chairman Paul Dee made an example of that school by slapping it with a two year bowl ban and cancelling 30 scholarships. But if the alleged violations at Miami prove to be true what punishment would fit the crime? Is it time for the NCAA to accept the inevitable, that high profile college football and basketball are fueled by huge contributions of cash. Is it possible to maintain the amateur status of these programs against the tsunami of money and gifts targeted at high performing athletes? Is it hypocritical to demand that these athletes remain amateurs when there professional counterparts are making millions?
Guests:
Frank Deford, NPR commentator heard every Wednesday on Morning Edition, Senior Contributing Writer at Sports Illustrated and senior correspondent on the HBO show RealSports With Bryant Gumbel; his latest novel, Bliss, Remembered, is a love story set at the 1936 Berlin Olympics and in World War II
Shelley Smith, Reporter for ESPN Sports Center
Forget about Mad Men – it’s mean men (and women) who are rolling in the dough
Brace yourself. Not only is that guy in the corner office a jerk, he’s probably making more money than you, precisely because he’s a jerk. This is according to a new study, “Do Nice Guys–and Gals–Really Finish Last?” conducted by three distinguished university professors and forthcoming in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. The researchers looked at “agreeableness” using self-reported data from a sampling of about 10,000 workers encompassing a wide range of professions, salaries and ages. Men who rated below average on the agreeableness scale earned about 18% more than the “nice guys.” That’s $9,772 more annually, which is anything but chump change. As for women, it turns out being rude or aggressive at work might not be as bad as customarily thought. The study showed that less agreeable women tend to earn about 5% or $1,828 more than those who are all sugar and spice. Why are employers rewarding bad behavior? Should employees cash in on this information? Does being agreeable help or hurt in your workplace? What role does gender play in all this?
Guest:
Beth Livingston, Assistant Professor, Cornell University, ILR School, Department of Human Resource Management; lead author of the study Do Nice Guys—and Gals—Really Finish Last?