prowling the sidelines, unattached to any supporting wires

November 21st, 2008 by Al Lewis (alewis)

No, give me a man in a tweed jacket and a rep tie and a snap brim, holding nothing more than a rolled up program in his hand, prowling the sidelines, unattached to any supporting wires. That was a football coach. Now we have technocrats in Goodwill chic.

When it comes to my own mini bucket list, I ticked off the easiest box first.Oakley Sunglasses Outlet I saw Streisand recently in Philadelphia and it probably was the best concert of my life. At 70, the woman still looks stunning. Bettis wants to start more conversations about those injuries and how to deal with the chronic pain that comes Cheap hockey Jerseys China with them, for both football players and non athletes, too. And Cheap Baseball Jerseys amid the renewed focus on the long term health of former football players, he wants the NFL to do more. (Similarly, the NBA’s players union last year voted to set aside money to provide better health care to former players.).

Technology has made the distances grow smaller. At any point of time you will not be out of touch with your loved ones. There are social networking sites, messengers, video Cheap Wholesale NFL Jerseys From China conferencing and plenty of other options as well. Oh, wait, Fake Oakleys Sale they already did. The only reason they didn’t get Discount hockey Jerseys Free Shipping away with it was because the historic college football rivalry between Stanford and Cal is commonly known as the Big Game, and the NFL’s proposed trademark would have stopped even them from using the phrase. If it were up to the NFL, they’d probably trademark the words “the,” “big,” “game” and “football” while they’re at it..

What we must do is constantly remind ourselves is that we still possess qualities that can also help us succeed in our second careers, as well: the drive to succeed, a steadfast work ethic, the willingness to adjust and adapt, being a team player and, most importantly, the ability to overcome adversity.During the NFL lockout this year, some startling numbers came to light as many players were forced to consider what their lives would be like without football.The average NFL career is 3.52 seasons;The average age of retired NFL players is 28;Within five years of leaving the league, 75% of NFL players end up broke, divorced or unemployed;65% of NFL players leave the game with permanent injuries;At least 20% of players reading this are clinically depressed;The average life expectancy for retired NFL players is 53 59 years.When you look at the statistics for the life of an NFL player, coupled with the CTE symptoms from repeated concussions, this checklist makes you wonder if “NFL” really stands for “not for long.”The NFL and NFL Players’ Association have now initiated programs to help players make the transition to their life after the game. Some of them I have attended myself, including the NFL’s Business Entrepreneurial Program held at the world renowned Wharton School of business. There we shared stories of depression, denial, financial hardship, loss of self esteem, loneliness but of all the Cheap Baseball Jerseys From China synergies that we felt, we all shared a loss of passion.If we fail to identify who we are without football, if we’re not ready to apply that passion elsewhere, then that sliding glass door of opportunity does not open as fast as one might expect.

Share This Idea:
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google


Tags: , , , ,

23 Responses to “prowling the sidelines, unattached to any supporting wires”

  1. mikedowling Says:

    this makes a lot of sense but you could get 90% of the impact with much less protest by starting this in maybe 2012 and just TELLING people that is a CERTAINTY to happen. that should change habits almost as well as actually doing it

  2. abillips Says:

    everyone else thinks gas prices should be low. You think they should be high. You are right, of course but good luck. People won’t hear that it is “offset” by a green dividend. All they will hear is, gas tax.

  3. alewis Says:

    I was thinking of writing that you could just threaten with 100% certainty to do this by a certain year, and that would be way better than doing nothing. Still, I would favor a phasing-in just to focus people’s attention but your point is well-taken.

  4. ira Says:

    I liked it better when gas prices were high anyway. A commute which used to take me (and does again take me) forty minutes was taking half an hour. That used less gas and stressed me less.

  5. onelesscar Says:

    we are hooked on big cars which get low mileage because we don’t have an energy policy. Carter started an energy policy but Reagan ended it. he actually relxed fuel economy standards so Detroit could build bigger cars

  6. econmajor Says:

    this is someting which someone should do a full paper on. It seems like it makes a lot of sense and I am looking for a topic. You have combiend several different proposals (gas tax, variable gas tax, “substitution effect” with the divident, and “infant industry”).

  7. gogreen Says:

    this could have already been done, Bush could have said last summer “we’ll suspend the gas tax now but if prices ever fall below $3, we’ll put enough of a tax back on that it stays at 43. Since no one thought it would ever be $3 again, no one would have objected. And we’ve have this solution already in place

  8. samuel Says:

    I read this last week and then read something in the Globe today about how we have to have more green energy. It was totally IN the box and missed all of your points! There was no mention of bringing in immigrants who are scientifically trained already, no discussion of how fossil fuels are too cheap (NO ONE has caught the defense budget point). It was spend-spend-spend.

  9. jim_dylan Says:

    This is the first mention I have heard of the link between defense spending and gasoline. I don’t see any numbers and I don’t know if anyone has ny but it has to be very big. The defense budget is maybe a trillion dollars and I would guess that’s close to what gets spent on fossil fuels, so if half of the defense budget is oil-related, then the price of fossil fuels should be 50% higher before even thinking about the cost of carbon dioxide

  10. Grady_Cash Says:

    Al’s suggestion has a lot of merit. We have already seen a dramatic fall in sales of SUVs and pickups due to the combined whammy of high gasoline prices and the recession. However, we still will have large numbers of these vehicles on the road for the next ten years as the US private vehicle fleet slowly turns over. Further, gasoline demand is not elastic in the classic supply and demand sense. After hurricane Katrina, gas prices doubled, but consumption remained at the same levels 12 months later. People still have to get to work, get kids to school, and pick up groceries. In addition to Al’s suggestion, we need to get these old SUVs off the roads quicker. One way to do this would be to phase in a federal “energy consumption” tax on all non-commercial vehicles weighing more than a set amount, say 3,400 pounds. Using 25 cents/pound as an example, a 6,000 pound SUV would have an annual tag renewal “energy consumption” surcharge of $650. At some point in the depreciation curve, the economics of paying $650 to license an aging vehicle would get these older SUVs off the road much quicker. At 50 cents/pound, it would happen much faster. This surcharge could be used to promote whatever energy initiatives are deemed most important, such as tax deductions on vehicles that get 40+ mpg… which already exist in abundance in Europe. An added advantage is that this would alleviate one of the objections to driving a smaller car… getting hit by a much larger SUV.

  11. paljoey Says:

    i’ve been following this and waiting for a proposal to do this–otherwise we’ll just be throwing subsidies at green solutions too. we subsidize more stuff than the Europeans do

  12. peter Says:

    This was proposed in the Times today, only not as well. They got the “variable tax’ part but failed to add the “green dividend” part — which is the KEY THING that makes this work.

  13. Mike Says:

    The people you should share this with are Kleiner Perkins — they have backed a ton of alternative energy companies which have no chance of succeeding without something like this to spur development

  14. Warren Says:

    I just bought a hybrid this summer — paid a premium over retail to get it because gasoline was going to be $5. How stupid was that? People are going to switch back to SUVs. What you are descirbing is an “energy policy” which this country hasn’t had since Carter.

  15. economist2b Says:

    the whole alternative energy industry is in danger here because the Hotelling Point, that’s where the price of renewable fuel finally gets lower than the price of fossil fuel, never seems to get any closer. The price of regular energy will fall over time, like it has been since the Greeks lit their lamps with olive oil. And oil costs less today than it did in 1980 not even adjustsed for inflation. The answer in Washington seems to be to subsidize alternative energy rather than make regular energy cost more, to get to the Hotelling Point. That is expensive and inefficient

  16. Terry Says:

    But if the government states that “gas will be sold at $4 a gallon” the distributors are going to sell it at $4 a gallon thus eliminating your tax base.

  17. alewis Says:

    Oh, good point — need to clarify something in order to prevent that. The tax is the same for every gas station and is added at the point of sale. So gas stations which negotiate a better deal with their source of supply will still ahve lower prices. You’re right, I think — if the tax were caibrated to keep gasoline at exactly $4 there would be no incentive for stations to negotiate deals with distritors

  18. littauergal Says:

    Obama isn’t getting this. Today he is proposing a massively subsidized commitment to alternative energy, which will never be competitive with what you point out is the massively subsidized fossil fuel industry. Economist2B has it right but no one is listening other than “Ec” graduate students like me.

  19. alewis Says:

    Littauer Gal’s point can be extended. I hope readers are noticing that the three sectors which have caused the most problems in this economy are also by far the three most heavily subsidized sectors — fossil fuels, housing, and health care. Coincidence? I think not.

  20. Charles Beall Says:

    Al Lewis for President in 2012!

  21. The Complete ThinkOOB Stimulus Economics Plan | ThinkOOB Says:

    [...] also a myth in the other direction, that “going green” is somehow very expensive.  As the “ The Green Dividend/ posting shows, it is essentially free to gently but firmly reconfigure society to use less [...]

  22. peterk Says:

    The Green Dividend is to a Gas Tax what Flintstones are to cod liver oil. You just have to look at the tepid response to cap-and-trade to see what happens when you don’t package things well

  23. The Green Dividend « Growth Reconsidered Says:

    [...] 14, 2010 Al Lewis has an idea for reducing carbon emissions in a politically feasible way. The “green dividend” in concept is very simple as applied to gasoline.  At the beginning of [...]

Leave a Reply