Guy Berger

You would probably like Live in Tokyo. Guy

It's fantastic. Guy

This is probably true. That said... 1) You would be right only if the IQ gap between 1st and 2nd borns varies according to economic background. An economic background effect that affects IQs across the board would have no impact on the results. 2) I would be very surprised if the authors did not attempt to control for economic background in their study. edit: From what I can tell, the authors controlled for the parents' education level, maternal age at birth, family size and birthweight. To the degree that these factors fail to completely account for economic background AND economic background has different effects on the IQ of 1st and 2nd borns, MG's point is meaningful. 2nd edit: Upon brief examination of the paper, it looks like the authors DO control for the factors above but don't consider the possibility that they would have differential effects on 1st and 2nd borns. So while my point #1 still stands, point #2 is true but irrelevant. Guy

Well, we aren't talking about intelligence -- we are talking about IQ. That said, this isn't an "assumption"; it seems to be an empirical fact. Guy

Well, the article isn't talking about a "theory" -- it's talking about the actual evidence, using a statistical examination of the empirical data. I haven't read the paper so I can't vouch for its substance. I'd be also interested in: A) How second-borns compare to third-borns. B) How first-borns in two child families compare to single children. Since (I believe) wealthy families tend to have less children, these kinds of results could have interesting implications for wealth and income inequality. Guy

Top 10 economies in terms of GDP per capita (PPP adjusted) / service sector as % of economy 1. Luxembourg: $80,471 / 86% 2. Ireland: $44,087 / 49% 3. Norway: $43,574 / 56.3% 4. United States: $43,444 / 78.6% 5. Iceland: $40,277 / ? 6. Switzerland: $37,369 / 64.5% 7. Denmark: $36.549 / 76% 8. Austria: $36,031 / 70.9% 9. Canada: $35,494 / 71.3% 10. Netherlands: $35,078 / 79% At the time (mid-19th century) agriculture was still quite unproductive. Hence, the fact that Britain had gotten a head start on industrialization made a big difference. Let's also keep in mind that Britain was a MUCH poorer country in 1870 than it is today, despite being the wealthiest in the world at the time. It was "economically strong" simply because everybody else was so ridiculously poor. Guy

That was my point. Well, it's a very underwhelming (and incorrect) one. Though I'm too lazy to dig through the historical data, I'm willing to bet that its fall from the #1 spot predates the peak of manufacturing's share in the British economy. Also, most of the countries currently ahead of Britain in the rankings have a very high services/GDP ratio. I'm also not sure why a tripling of British GDP per capita over the past 50 years counts as an "economic decline". Guy

Me too. Guy

But Britain has been slipping farther and farther down the league table. Since about the 1870s, I think. MG What if you had told an Englishman in 1870 that Ireland* would be a substantially wealthier country than Great Britain 140 years later? Guy *The service sector takes up 49% of Ireland's economy.

While you are correct to a degree, I don't think it's as big of a degree as you think. The British thought "services" could replace manufacturing, as did other major economic powers of the past. When they reached that stage, they were already fading. As are we. Not sure what you are talking about -- Britain's per capita GDP is now higher than it was 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. Guy ps From Eurostat, Britain's GDP per capita in terms of 1995 Euros (?):

What do you mean by "economic strength"? Guy Consumption and production as a sign of industrial strength. 1) Since agriculture and services can be important sectors of economy, "industrial strength" and "economic strength" are not the same thing. 2) Since poorer economies tend to use dirtier technologies, they also tend to have much higher emissions/GDP ratios. 3) India and China have huge populations, and obviously that's going to make their emissions large. If their populations were 1/10th as large, we wouldn't be having this conversation. (Nobody is starting threads about the Luxembourg's economic strength.) Guy

What do you mean by "economic strength"? Guy

Let me be upfront: I haven't heard the Grant Green album in question. Also, AFAIK, I've never heard Peter Bernstein. I also agree that all other things being equal, it's better to go to the source rather than to the imitators. That said, if this is an n-th tier GG album, I don't see any reason to recommend it over presumably superior work by Bernstein (assuming it exists). Guy

I'm interested to see whether there's really a market for this brand. Guy

Get better, man! Guy

Annoying hipster poses never go out of fashion, unfortunately...hard to even appreciate the points in there that I agreed with to some extent, simply because those quoted were reekin' of the old attitude. And yeah, SGT. PEPPER is somewhat overrated, but hasn't that been said about ten thousand times by previous indiots? (Term courtesy of my friend Linn Tate.) C'mon, kids, get a fresh start--bash REVOLVER for a change. Let me add that a fraction of musicians from any genre (and people in general) are wankers. The question is why we/music journalists/The Guardian care any more about what these specific wankers think than they do about Bon Jovi's insights.. Guy

D'oh, I forgot about the version on Exposure. (Which I haven't heard.) The piano-and-voice version appears on Gabriel's Shaking the Tree compilation and was recorded in 1990. I assume that's also the version on the more recent 2 cd compilation. Guy

indie rock musicians pick the "most overrated" album While I didn't find most of their arguments to be convincing, they did manage to convince me that some indie rock musicians are annoying wankers. Guy

link

I heard the piano-and-voice version first, and strongly prefer it to the earlier, rock-and-orchestra version. The latter strikes me as a lot of empty bombast. Whereas the stark arrangement on the 1990 version (as well as Gabriel's more ragged voice) brings out a lot more of the lyrics' emotional resonance. Guy

It isn't small to the coach who was fired, the program that was dismantled, or especially the three young men who had their entire lives turned upside down. But it should be "small" to the rest of us. Chuck is right. Guy

yes, they are distributed and i don't know if also manufactured by Universal. they carry their logo. just repressings of the old late 80s/early 90s OJCs though. but it looks like the full catalog has been repressed. to be honest i was quite surprised when i first saw them pop up. but isn't there another thread about that? and about hoarding: i've been on some mad shopping sprees myself chasing down what i saw as old, soon to be or already OOP titles in the past. but i've had nasty suprises, like seeing them pop up some time later or while still shrink wrapped in my back log. i'm much more careful now. and what's been recommended here is well worth having. no doubt. Count me as a skeptic about your claim. Amazon.fr, amazon.com and amazon.co.uk list Don Friedman's Metamorphosis and Charles McPherson's Con Alma as OOP. I imagine there are many other titles like this. Guy

l i n k

Really? I've noticed a lot of the OJC items are now OOP on amazon. Are they in print in Europe? Guy