One in four girls and one in six boys will be sexually abused before they turn 18 years old, according to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.
Esser H, Resch T, Pamminger M, Mutschlechner B, Troppmair J, Riedmann M, Gassner E, Maglione M, Margreiter C, Boesmueller C, Oberhuber R, Weissenbacher A, Cardini B, Finkenstedt A, Zoller H, Tilg H, Öfner D, Schneeberger S.
Transplantation. 2019 Apr 10. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000002759. [Epub ahead of print]
A new study from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety finds drivers remain distracted after using hands-free technology for calls. Detroit-area drivers say they often see distracted drivers but several believe hands-free is safer. Eric D. Lawrence/Detroit Free Press
A new national study found that more than half of motorists think distracted driving is the biggest threat on the road, while nearly more than 90 percent admitted to talking on their cell phone while driving.
And Gen Xers are the biggest offenders, according to a survey conducted by The Harris Poll and Volvo.
The survey was conducted online by The Harris Poll last June, which included responses from 2,035 U.S. adults aged 18 and older, with 1,665 of them being drivers. A follow-up study included 2,015 adults, including 1,894 drivers to better understand the role of voice commands in vehicles. Volvo said the online surveys are not based on a probability sample, so a theoretical sampling error cannot be calculated.
Fifty-five percent of Americans believe the No. 1 threat motorists face is distracted driving, higher than the more common road threats, such as driving under the influence (31%), driving aggressively (8%), or speeding (3%). Phones were cited as the top source of distraction, at 43%.
The study also revealed which generation is more likely to use their phone behind the wheel. Gen X and Millennials are tied at 81%, while Young Boomers are not far behind, at 72%. Gen Z drivers are more focused on the road than their parents, with 71% of the group using phones while driving.
At least nine Americans die and 100 are injured nationwide every day in distracted driving crashes, according to the National Safety Council. In addition, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute say that most crashes and near-crashes are the result of inattentive driving.
While distracted driving is the result of many car accidents, more people die from drunk driving. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, almost 30 people died every day in drunk driving crashes in 2017, one person every 48 minutes.
Parents with children under 18 are among the most likely to use their phones while driving, with 95% of them using their devices at a stoplight compared to 90% of overall drivers. In addition, 62% of parents are more likely to use their phones with their children in the car compared to 38% all drivers.
When it comes to distracted driving, 93% of Americans admitted to talking on the phone while in their vehicle, while 74% said they’d dialed a number. Sixty percent of drivers said they send texts while driving, or check notifications (56%). Americans also admitted to having easy access to their phones in the car, with 66% of drivers having their devices in arm’s reach.
As more Americans are driving with interruptions, some drivers are taking steps to control them. Thirty-three percent of drivers are choosing to drive in silence, while 32% turn on the “do not disturb” mode on their phones.
To mark Distracted Driving Awareness Month in April, follow these tips from the Office of Highway Safety Planning:
- Get familiar with vehicle features and equipment before pulling out into traffic.
- Preset radio stations, MP3 devices, and climate control.
- Secure items that may move around when the car is in motion. Do not reach down or behind the seat to pick up items.
- Do not text, access the Internet, watch videos, play video games, search MP3 devices, or use any other distracting technology while driving.
- Avoid smoking, eating, drinking, and reading while driving.
- Pull safely off the road and out of traffic to deal with children.
- Do personal grooming at home.
- Review maps and driving directions before hitting the road.
- Monitor traffic conditions before engaging in activities that could divert attention away from driving.
- Ask a passenger to help with activities that may be distracting.
- If driving long distances, schedule regular stops, every 100 miles or two hours.
- Travel at times when you are normally awake and stay overnight rather than driving straight through.
- Avoid alcohol and medications that may make you drowsy.
Read or Share this story: https://www.freep.com/story/money/business/2019/04/16/distracted-driving-statistics/3449038002/
DUBOIS — Junior Brandon Orsich (Clearfield) posted his third complete game victory and sophomore twins Zane and Thayne Morgan (Clearfield) drove in four runs as Penn State DuBois defeated Penn State Mont Alto 12-2 in the first game of an important Pennsylvania State University Athletic Conference doubleheader at Showers Field Saturday.
Orsich pitched a seven-hitter with one strikeout and two walks, working just six innings because of the Mercy Rule.
Zane Morgan drove in three runs with a triple and a single and also scored twice, while Thayne Morgan added an RBI single.
Freshman Jake Sorbera (Clearfield) was one of seven pitchers who went to the mound in the 13-3 nightcap loss that was the Lions’ first in 11 PSUAC games. He gave up one run on a walk and two hits in a 2-/3-inning stint.
The split kept Penn State DuBois two games ahead of Penn State Mont Alto (8-3) in the PSUAC West Division race.
Earlier in the week, the Lions (20-8) had their 14-game win streak halted by Clarion, 5-4, after rising to No. 2 in the United States Coaches Athletic Association national rankings.
Orsich (6-0) leads the PSUAC and is tied for second in the USCAA in wins. His 2.06 earned run average ranks fourth in the conference and fifth in the nation.
The right-hander has pitched 35 innings in eight starts, allowing 35 hits, six walks and eight runs, all earned. He has 15 strikeouts.
The Morgans are the team’s top hitters, Thayne at .467 (28-for-60) that is third in the PSUAC and ninth in the USCAA, and Zane at .400 (22-for-55).
Thayne Morgan also leads in runs (21) and stolen bases (18), which are second in the conference and fourth in the nation. He has driven in 10 runs in 25 games.
Zane Morgan’s stats for 22 games show five doubles, one home run, 15 RBIs, 18 runs and seven stolen bases.
Sorbera has made 10 relief appearances with a 1-0 record and a 2.45 ERA for 18-1/3 innings. He has recorded seven strikeouts and surrendered 15 hits, eight walks and six runs, with five earned.
* * * * * * * * * * *
MEN’S TRACK & FIELD
NEW WILMINGTON — Pitt-Johnstown sophomore Mason Royer (Clearfield) placed 16th in the 110-meter hurdles in 17.28 seconds and 36th in the 100 dash in 12.36 at the Westminster Invitational Saturday.
* * * * * * * * * * *
WOMEN’S TRACK & FIELD
FAIRFAX, Va. — St. Francis (Pa.) University senior Sarah Lash (Clearfield) threw the javelin 30.98 meters (101 feet, 8 inches) to place 21st in the Mason Spring Invitational hosted by George Mason Saturday.
- James Holzhauer, the current reigning “Jeopardy!” champion, is currently on an 11-day winning streak.
- The Las Vegas-resident and professional sports gambler has taken home more than $770,000 so far.
- But Holzhauer isn’t just getting lucky. His impressive daily totals (four of them tallying upwards of $100,000) are a result of how he plays the game — knowing when to hit the buzzer, how much to bet on daily doubles, and which clues to knock off the board first.
- Other famous “Jeopardy!” champions used similar strategies to increase their earnings and guarantee a win.
- In 2014, contestant Arthur Chu used principals of game theory in determining how much to bet during Final Jeopardy to maximize his chances of moving onto the next day of game play.
Just making it onto the show “Jeopardy!” is challenging enough. But winning the day once you’re in the studio is even more difficult.
Unless you know how to play the odds.
Recently, 11-day “Jeopardy!” champion James Holzhauer secured his place in the annals of “Jeopardy!” fame. The 34-year-old sports gambler from Las Vegas has broken nearly every “Jeopardy!” record there is, including the highest one-day winnings record with the $131,127 he brought in on April 17.
He’s giving the infamous Ken Jennings a (literal) run for his money.
But Holzhauer’s impressive daily totals are no accident. While certainly his impressive trivia knowledge contributes to his back-to-back success, his 11-day, $771,920 total has more to do with how he plays the game than the answers he gets right or wrong.
Holzhauer’s “Jeopardy!” hacks
To start, he focuses quite a bit on hitting the show’s iconic buzzer at just the right time, The Ringer reported. Holzhauer grilled “Jeopardy!” producer Maggie Speak about the specifics of the buzzer timing, trying to pinpoint precisely when a Jeopardy! staffer activates the switch that enables contestants to ring in after host Alex Trebek finishes reading the clue.
If Holzhauer hits the buzzer just a hair too soon, he knows he’ll get locked out for about a quarter of a second, which tends to be enough for a competitor to get a buzzer in edgewise, according to The Ringer.
What’s more, Holzhauer goes for the high-value clues first. He tends to answer these correctly, aggregating a lot of money very quickly in the game. Then, when he comes across a Daily Double, he bets big, often doubling his total (and subsequently doubling it again).
The tips and tricks aside, however, there’s no question that Holzhauer’s foundation of superior trivia knowledge helps him take home the win again and again.
On April 17, when he broke his own one-day winnings record, Holzhauer played a perfect game. In “Jeopardy!” terms, that means every question he buzzed in for he answered correctly. He said a big part of his preparations for the game show involved reading children’s books.
All told, Holzhauer sits in second place for all-time regular-season earnings — behind Ken Jennings, who won 74 games in a row to take home $2,520,700 in 2004.
On April 18, Jennings gave Holzhauer some well-deserved kudos. “This is absolutely insane. I’ve always wanted to see someone try Jeopardy! wagering this way who had the skills to back it up,” Jennings tweeted.
Using game theory to bet on Final Jeopardy
Holzhauer isn’t the only famous “Jeopardy!” champion who’s gamed the game.
Arthur Chu, a 35-year-old columnist from Albany, New York, carried an impressive 11-day winning streak in 2014.
The columnist’s strategy was less rapacious than Holzhauer’s; Chu had only netted a comparatively meager $298,200 when he was finally dethroned.
But Chu’s goal wasn’t to win the most money per day. Rather, it was to give himself the highest probability of being able to return to the show the next day and play again using game theory.
He achieved this by modulating the way he placed his Final Jeopardy bets. Chu made waves during his 11-day streak because instead of betting to win, he purposefully wagered an amount that would result in a tie if both he and his trailing competitor correctly guessed the Final Jeopardy clue. Leading contestants often bet $1 more than the tying wager.
But in the event that they get the clue wrong and their opponents get it right, sometimes that means losing the game by just $1.
There were a few instances in which Chu wagered to tie when he didn’t have to, and both he and his competitor moved on to the next day of play. To Chu, that’s no harm, no foul and better than risking a loss. He said he knicked this strategy from Keith Williams, a former “Jeopardy!” champion who now runs The Final Wager blog.
The hunt for Daily Doubles
Chu was also apt at scouring the board for Daily Doubles — consistently selecting higher-value clues from the bottom of the board, but bouncing from category to category to do so — using what’s known in the Jeopardy annals as “The Forrest Bounce,” named after former champion Chuck Forrest who utilized the technique.
But when he came across a Daily Double in a category he knew nothing about — “The Sports Hall of Fame” for instance — Chu bet small. Pitifully small.
Even though Chu answered this piece of sports trivia incorrectly, losing a cool $5, it benefited him in the long run. He stopped his competitors (who might have more sports know-how than he does) from having the opportunity to bet big and answer correctly.
Bouncing from category to category has the added benefit of throwing off his opponents who may have hit their stride in a single category.
Holzhauer employs the same Daily Double strategy hunting — instead of working his way down an entire category — he bounces around.
But Holzhauer has become less of a polarizing figure than Chu was (many “Jeopardy!” fans took umbrage with Chu’s seemingly blasé playing style, calling him a villain); Slate went so far as to say that Holzhauer could be the “Serena Williams” of “Jeopardy!”
The Las Vegas gambler currently holds the top four slots in single-day winnings, beating the existing $77,000 record set by Roger Craig in 2010.
On Friday night, Holzhauer will palm the buzzer for a 12th time on “Jeopardy!” If he plays his clues right, he could walk away with another night’s worth of winnings, bringing him even closer to the $1,000,000 mark.
|Grace Smith, GW||62||41||.661|
|Delani Buckner, HH||37||22||.595|
|Caiti Mathes, Hurr.||83||49||.590|
|Brianna McCown, GW||57||32||.561|
|Jenna Thomas, Siss.||70||37||.557|
|Jillian Holley, SA||54||30||.556|
|Katy Darnell, GW||67||37||.552|
|Gracie Payne, SA||44||23||.523|
|Olivia Corbett, Catholic||46||24||.522|
|Lena Elkins, Nitro||56||29||.518|
|Cortney Fizer, HH||35||18||.514|
|Zoey Dunlap, Hurr.||84||43||.512|
|Emma Pauley, Riv.||45||23||.511|
|Kelly Kreitzer, Catholic||49||25||.510|
|Lindsey Phares, Hurr.||88||44||.500|
|Hailey Harr, Nitro||50||25||.500|
|Presley McGee, HH||41||20||.488|
|Rebekah Woody, HH||48||23||.479|
|Sarah Harless, Riv.||44||21||.477|
|Jess Canterbury, HH||40||19||.475|
|Grace Johnson, SC||38||18||.474|
|Sydni Cawley, Nitro||51||24||.471|
|Alexis Bailey, Siss.||66||31||.470|
|Jasmine Symns, Riv.||49||23||.469|
|Grayson Buckner, HH||30||14||.467|
|Megan Seafler, HH||43||20||.465|
|Kelsie Lanham, Riv.||41||19||.463|
|Emma Groe, GW||61||28||.459|
|Bailey Gilbert, SA||33||15||.455|
|Aly Soblit, Siss.||66||30||.455|
|Taylor McCray, Hurr.||53||24||.453|
|Fran George, Catholic||51||23||.451|
|Emma Meade, Siss.||71||31||.437|
|Hanna Casey, Catholic||39||17||.436|
|Kalissa Lacy, GW||55||24||.436|
|Hallie Dinklocker, SC||67||29||.433|
|Kendall Stoffel, SA||63||27||.429|
|Emily Sharp, SA||50||21||.420|
|Julia Vancamp, SA||31||13||.419|
|Kerigan Moore, Nitro||60||25||.417|
|Taylor Glancy, SA||48||20||.417|
|Emily Ross, SC||59||24||.407|
|Emma Sitler, GW||37||15||.405|
|Alivia Meeks, Hurr.||86||34||.395|
|Taylor Long, Siss.||61||24||.393|
|Faith Gaylor, Winf.||51||20||.392|
|Jenna Harper, Riv.||36||14||.388|
|Bella Savilla, Nitro||57||22||.386|
|Harlie Vannatter, Hurr.||76||28||.368|
|Kate Smallman, Riv.||38||14||.368|
|Kennedy Dean, Winf.||63||23||.363|
|Emily Taylor, Siss.||50||18||.360|
|Iris Hoyer, Catholic||45||16||.356|
|Rylee Nottingham, HH||31||11||.355|
|Taylor Carpenter, HH||31||11||.355|
|Gracelyn Hill, Siss.||51||18||.353|
|Morgan Burdette, Nitro||54||19||.352|
|Megan Walton, SC||54||19||.352|
Kendell Merrell 40 14 .350
14: Mathes, Hurricane
12: Thomas, Sissonville
8: Smith, GW; McCown, GW
7: Darnell, GW; McCray, Hurricane
6: Elkins, Nitro; Savilla, Nitro
5: Glancy, SA; Dean, Winfield
4: Groe, GW; Reagan Schultz, Hurricane; Stoffel, SA; Medley, Winfield
3: Laruen Price, GW; Fizer, HH; Sharp, SA; Holley, SA; Bailey, Siss.
48: Thomas, Siss.
46: Mathes, Hurricane
33: Smith, GW
29: McCown, GW
28: McCray, Hurricane; Savilla, Nitro; Glancy, SA
27: Dunlap, Hurricane; Vannatter, Hurricane
25: Darnell, GW; Fizer, HH
24: Elkins, NItro; Stoffel, SA
22: Groe, GW; Bailey, Sissonville; Elyssa Medley, Winfield
21: McGee, HH; Meeks, Hurricane; Phares, Hurricane; Soblit, Sissonville; Dean, Winfield
20: Corbett, Catholic; Casey, Catholic; Woody, HH
3: Smith, GW; Woody, HH; G. Buckner, HH; Haley Carroll, Nitro; Bailey, Sissonville; Soblit, Sissonville
2: Corbett, Catholic; Mathes, Fizer, HH; Hurricane; Schultz, Hurricane; Pauley, Riverside; Meade, Sissonville; Taylor, Sissonville; K.K. Short, Winfield
12: Phares, Hurricane
11: Corbett, Catholic; Dunlap, Hurricane
10: Bailey, Sissonville
9: Smith, GW; Elkins, NItro; Harless, Riverside; Stoffel, SA
8: Woody, HH; McGee, HH; Seafler, HH; Vannatter, Hurricane; Meeks, Hurricane
7: Darnell, GW; Mathes, Hurricane; Medley, Winfield; Dean, WInfield
6: Groe, GW; Price, GW; Holley, SA; Ross, SC; Meade, Sissonville
20: Ross, SC
19: Kreitzer, Catholic
16: Mercedes Bush, Poca
15: George, Catholic
13: Dinklocker, SC
11: Symns, Riverside
10: Burdette, Nitro; Meade, Sissonville
9: Darnell, GW; Moore, Nitro
8: Woody, HH; Kait Griffith, SA Tori Wells, SC; Genevieve Potter, SC; Beane, Sissonville
7: Seafler, HH; Elkins, Nitro; Alivia Nunley, SA; Sydney Atkins, SC; Long, Sissonville; Taylor, Sissonville; Hill, Sissonville
19-5: Vannatter, Hurricane
16-3: Madison Legg, Sissonville
12-5: Corbett, Catholic
11-1: McCown, GW
10-1: Savilla, Nitro
8-1: D. Buckner, HH; Stoffel, SA
7-0: McGee, HH
7-2: Medley, Winfield
6-1: Smith, GW; Kinsey Hudson, SA
6-2: Elkins, Nitro
6-5: Gaylor, WInfield
0.79: D. Buckner, HH
1.01: McGee, HH
1.35: McCown, GW
1.42: Savilla, Nitro
1.48: Smith, GW
2.13: Hudson, SA
2.17: Stoffel, SA
2.18: Elkins, Nitro
2.20: Legg, Sissonville
2.33: Corbett, Catholic
3.39: Vannatter, Hurricane
3.56: Medley, Winfield
4.13: Gaylor, Winfield
4.73: Lexi Scarberry, SC
157: Vannatter, Hurricane
130: Corbett, Catholic
128: Legg, Sissonville
104: D. Buckner, HH
91: McCown, GW
80: Savilla, Nitro
70: Stoffel, SA
60: Elkins, Nitro
58: Scarberry, SC
56: McGee, HH
51: Hudson, SA
41: Grace Tucker, Riverside
37: Gaylor, WInfield
33: Smith, GW; Makenzie Confere, Riverside
30: Medley, WInfield
The focus for the Detroit Tigers this season isn’t so much what’s happening at Comerica Park as it is what’s happening in Toledo, Erie, West Michigan and Lakeland.
Here’s a look at how the Tigers’ top-15 prospects are performing this season.
*Rankings from Free Press sports writer Anthony Fenech; click on the player’s name for more stats:
[ Sign up for our free Detroit Tigers newsletter ]
Class: Double-A Erie.
Stats: 2-0, 0.75 ERA, 15 strikeouts, two hits allowed in 12 innings over 2 starts.
Class: Class-A Lakeland.
Stats: 1-0, 0.82 ERA, 15 strikeouts, five hits allowed in 11 innings over 2 starts.
Stats: .273 AVG/.393 OBP/.455 SLG with 1 home run, 7 RBIs in six games.
Class: Triple-A Toledo.
Stats: .263/.383.447 with 1 home run, 6 RBIs, 1-for-2 on steals in 10 games.
Class: Class-A West Michigan.
Stats: .200/.300/.314 with 1 home run, 4 RBIs, 2 steals in 9 games.
Stats: 0-2, 6.57 ERA, 16 strikeouts, 10 walks in 12.1 innings over 3 starts.
Stats: .150/.320/.250 with 1 triple, 4 RBIs in 6 games.
Stats: .353/.410/.382 with 4 RBIs, 1 steal in 9 games.
10. RHP Beau Burrows
Stats: 0-0, 0.00 ERA, 12 strikeouts, 10.1 innings in 2 starts.
11. SS Wenceel Perez
Class: West Michigan.
Stats: .162/.205/.189 with 2 RBIs, 2-for-3 steals in 9 games.
Stats: .148/.258/.222 with 2 RBIs, 5-for-6 on steals in 8 games.
13. RHP Alex Faedo
Stats: 0-0, 1.50 ERA with 15 strikeouts in 12 innings over 2 starts.
14. 2B Kody Clemens
Stats: .100/.250/.133 with 2 RBIs with 1 steal in 9 games.
15. RHP Jason Foley
Stats: 0-0, 3.00 ERA with 5 strikeouts in 3 innings over 3 games.
BABIP, or Batting Average on Balls In Play, is the “gateway drug” to other sabermetric statistics in fantasy baseball.
What is BABIP? The actual equation is below for those of you who like numbers, but for those of you who don’t, it’s a statistic that measures the percentage of fair balls that fall for a hit. The metric excludes sacrifices and home runs, but otherwise would include all batted balls within the two foul lines.
BABIP = (Hits – Home Runs) / (At-Bats – Strikeouts – Home runs + Sacrifices)
So why should you care? For one, BABIP is one of the easiest to understand sabermetrics and is increasingly being used on televised broadcasts. More importantly, however, BABIP can measure the overall talent of a hitter while simultaneously indicate whether a batter is struggling or succeeding due to luck.
League-wide BABIP typically hovers around .300, while the average in 2018 was .296. While sometimes it’s relevant to compare a player to the league-wide average, often the best way to analyze BABIP for individual players is by looking at his career average. If his BABIP is significantly different from his career numbers, then that should indicate something is going on.
There are three primary factors that impact a player’s BABIP:
1. Talent: The concept is logical, but better hitters tend to hit the ball harder. The harder the ball is hit, the less time the fielder has to react.
2. Luck: Sometimes it doesn’t matter how hard a ball is it if it’s hit right at a defender, or if every blooper in the outfield is hit just at the right distance to fall between the shortstop and left-fielder. Over the course of the entire season, ball placement will generally level out, but things like the shift can significantly alter a player’s BABIP for heavy pull hitters.
3. Defense: Hitters can’t control the defense that is fielding their batted balls, which is why defense can cause BABIP to fluctuate up and down. A hit down the third baseline with Nolan Arenado at third base is less likely to result in a hit than the same hit with Miguel Andujar manning third.
Why is BABIP a “gateway drug?” BABIP is best used to flag interesting players to analyze, but ultimately you need to look at other statistics to confirm your hunch. If a player’s BABIP is much lower than his career average, the easy analysis is to label him as being unlucky and his BABIP (and consequently his batting average and other counting stats) should naturally rise closer to his average levels, making him a nice buy low. The inverse is true, as well, that if a player’s BABIP is significantly higher than his career average, meaning his performance will most likely regress back to his career levels, making him a sell high candidate. You can use this as a general guideline to help make decisions until you’re able to master the other indicator sabermetrics like hard hit rate or barrels per plate appearance.
Here’s a preview of the week ahead in fantasy baseball.
Favorable two-start available pitchers:
Max Fried (Atlanta) — vs Arizona, @ Cleveland
Matt Shoemaker (Toronto) — @ Minnesota, @ Oakland
Joey Lucchesi (San Diego) — vs Colorado, vs Cincinnati
Reynaldo Lopez (Chicago) — vs Kansas City, @ Detroit
Kyle Gibson (Minnesota) — vs Toronto, @ Baltimore
Jake Odorizzi (Minnesota) — vs Toronto, @ Baltimore
Felix Pena (Los Angeles) — vs @ Texas, vs Seattle
Trevor Richards (Miami) — vs Chicago, vs Washington
Consider using the following schedule notes as a guide when making weekly lineup decisions between two close players on your roster.
Favorable offensive schedules
Los Angeles Angels — LAA will draw 6 average to below average starting pitchers over the next 7 days and 4 of those starters will be left-handed.
Kansas City — KC will face 5 average starting pitchers over the next 7 days, which will be partially offset by facing LHP James Paxton and RHP Masahiro Tanaka next weekend.
Los Angeles Dodgers LAD will face 6 average to below average starting pitchers and will play 4 games in the offensive friendly Miller Park. The best starting pitcher they will face is RHP Luis Castillo.
Unfavorable offensive schedule
Atlanta Braves — ATL will face LHP Robbie Ray, RHP Corey Kluber, RHP Trevor Bauer, and RHP Shane Bieber
San Francisco Giants — SF will face RHP Stephen Strasburg, LHP Patrick Corbin, RHP Jameson Taillon and RHP Chris Archer
Teams with seven games: Angels, Blue Jays, Brewers, Dodgers, Mariners, Orioles, Phillies, Reds, Royals, Twins, White Sox
Teams with five games: Astros, Athletics, Pirates
Waiver wire additions for offense
Carlos Gonzalez (OF) – Power (+), Batting Average Risk (-)
Raimel Tapia (OF) – Batting Avg (+), Favorable Ballpark(+), Low power (-)
Jarrod Dyson (OF) – Speed (+), Low power (-)
Hunter Dozier (1B/3B) – Power (+), Position Eligibility (+), Schedule (+), Bad Team (-)
Tyler O’Neill (OF) – Power (+), Potential Role Change (+)
Leonys Martin (OF) – Speed (+), Favorable Batting Order Position (+), Bad Team (-)
Brian Goodwin (OF) – Runs (+), Speed (+), Low Power (-)
Brandon Lowe (2B) – Power (+)
Waiver wire additions for pitching
Touki Tousant (SP) – K% (+), Role Change(+)
AJ Minter (RP) – New Closer (+), K% (+)
Hector Neris (RP) – Potential Closer (+), K% (+)
Erik Swanson (SP) – Role Change (K%), Former Top Prospect (+)
Max Fried (SP) – High Groundball % (+), Good Ratios (+), Low K% (-)
Michael Waldo is a member of the Fantasy Sports Writers Association (FSWA) and is a season-long fantasy sports analyst for Fantistics Fantasy Sports, as well as the managing editor of MyFantasyFix, a daily fantasy sports (DFS) research website. You can hear him host the Fantistics show on SiriusXM Fantasy Sports Radio on weekend mornings 9 a.m.-noon. Follow Waldo on Twitter @MichaelWaldo or reach him via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Michels S, Massutí B, Schildhaus HU, Franklin J, Sebastian M, Felip E, Grohé C, Rodriguez-Abreu D, Abdulla DSY, Bischoff H, Brandts C, Carcereny E, Corral J, Dingemans AC, Pereira E, Fassunke J, Fischer RN, Gardizi M, Heukamp L, Insa A, Kron A, Menon R, Persigehl T, Reck M, Riedel R, Rothschild SI, Scheel AH, Scheffler M, Schmalz P, Smit EF, Limburg M, Provencio M, Karachaliou N, Merkelbach-Bruse S, Hellmich M, Nogova L, Büttner R, Rosell R, Wolf J.
J Thorac Oncol. 2019 Apr 9. pii: S1556-0864(19)30276-X. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.03.020. [Epub ahead of print]
If you listen to Larry Kudlow, director of the National Economic Council in the Trump White House, or Trump Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, or Karl Rove, or former GOP Speaker of the House John Boehner, or 2012 Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, or Gretchen Carlson, or the Wall Street Journal, or Bloomberg News, or the Tax Foundation, or the Heritage Foundation, or Fox, or Fox, or Fox, or just any elderly white relatives who forward you chain emails, you’ve probably encountered statistics like this:
• The top 1 percent of American earners pay almost 40 percent of all federal income taxes. That’s more than the bottom 90 percent pay combined!
• The top 20 percent of Americans pay almost 90 percent of all federal income taxes.
• The bottom 50 percent of Americans pay just 3 percent of federal income taxes. That’s less than the top 0.001 percent — just 1,400 taxpayers or so — who pay a bit over 3 percent of all federal income taxes.
Liberals see these numbers and think: This can’t possibly be right. Yet it is. All of the above is completely accurate.
Conservatives love these numbers, because the implication is clear: The libs want to soak the rich, but the rich are already soaking wet. And now fringe extremists like like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez want the government’s grasping hand to take even more from the heroic job creators who are generously supporting the rest of us!
So what’s going on here?
The answer: This is a classic example of how to lie with statistics. It’s shameless but effective propaganda, which is why the people with the most to gain from it pay propagandists to spread it widely. Anyone pushing this is trying to fool you, and you should ignore anything they say on any subject.
There are two main aspects to the deception.
First, these numbers refer only to federal income taxes. Both the federal and the income part are important.
The income tax is not the only tax collected by the federal government — far from it. Just half of the taxes collected by the federal government come from the income tax. About a third come from payroll taxes — which fall much more heavily on working people, since they’re largely levied only on the first $130,000 or so of earned income.
This means the rich pay a far lower payroll tax rate than regular people. A nurse making a salary of $50,000 per year pays (counting both the employee and employer side) 12.4 percent in OASDI taxes (for Social Security and disability insurance). But a sitcom star making a thousand times that, or $50 million a year, will pay the 12.4 percent only on the initial $130,000 of their salary, working out to a total OASDI tax rate of just 0.03 percent on their $50 million. And because OASDI taxes are only levied on earned income — meaning, money you make from a job — a billionaire investor with a $50 million annual income from dividends and capital gains will pay exactly zero percent in OASDI taxes.
Then there’s the fact that it’s not just the federal government that taxes Americans. There are also many, many state and local taxes: State income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and more. Some of these, such as sales taxes, are actually regressive — i.e., the less money you make, the higher tax rate you have to pay.
Second, the wealthy naturally pay a disproportionate share of federal income taxes because they make a disproportionate share of the country’s income. In other words, these numbers to some degree demonstrate exactly the opposite of what those who use them claim: They’re not an indication that the superrich are beleaguered, but are in part a sign of America’s staggering wealth inequality.
It is true that the federal income tax is still significantly progressive — that is, the tax rate is higher on higher income. But as Thomas Jefferson would tell you, this is exactly what should happen in a country like the U.S. Jefferson wrote this to James Madison in 1785 from monarchical France: “The property of this country is absolutely concentered in a very few hands … the consequences of this enormous inequality producing so much misery to the bulk of mankind, legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property. … [One means is] to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise.” Adam Smith also believed in progressive taxes.
So what does the overall U.S. tax system look like when you take all of this into account?
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, or ITEP, a progressive Washington, D.C. think tank, is the only organization that studies this in detail. Each year, they publish a report called “Who Pays Taxes in America?”
This graph is taken from their latest edition and is a projection for 2019.
What this shows is that, when you take all U.S. taxes into account — federal income taxes, federal payroll taxes, federal corporate taxes, the federal estate tax, federal excise taxes, and the plethora of state and local taxes — the U.S. tax system is just mildly progressive.
If the U.S. tax system were perfectly flat, the share of taxes paid by each group of Americans above would be equal to their share of income.
Instead, the top 1 percent — with an average income of about $2 million — made 20.9 percent of America’s income, but paid 24.1 percent of America’s taxes. Few people will perceive this as a monstrous injustice.
Meanwhile, the middle 20 percent of Americans— with incomes between $41,000 and $66,000 per year — make 10.9 percent of America’s income and pay 9.4 percent of America’s taxes. The bottom 20 percent, making less than $23,000, make just 2.8 percent of America’s income and pay 2 percent of America’s taxes. That is, the “lucky duckies” of the right’s imagination who pay little to nothing in income taxes are still paying a significant portion of their income in taxes overall.
The same data can also be looked at like this, also from the ITEP report:
Again, this shows that the U.S. tax system overall is slightly progressive. The top 1 percent pays a total of 33.7 percent of their income in taxes — a bit more than those just below them on the income scale and more than the middle class, but not by much. Meanwhile, even the poorest Americans are paying a significant chunk of their income in taxes.