25 Burst results for "Harvard College"
Mike Gallagher Podcast
Alvin Bragg Prefers Releasing Real Criminals to Commit Crimes Again
"And see a little bit of Tucker Carlson's reporting last night on what this really dastardly district attorney has been doing from day one when he became district attorney out of New York City. Even as Bragg has been single mindedly focused bragga graduate of Harvard college, on Donald Trump and his crimes sending money to a porn star, he has been not only ignoring real crimes, but downgrading felonies to misdemeanors and letting actual violent criminals out of jail as quickly as possible. On his first day in office, first day, Bragg consistent with the ideas of the man who paid for his campaign, George Soros issued a memo explaining his office will quote not seek a sentence except in cases involving homicides, economic crimes, and a small number of felonies. That was great news for people who commit violent felonies, including rapists like Justin Washington, Washington struck a deal with Bragg that allowed him to serve just 30 days in jail under the theory that his rape was really just second degree coercion. So he got out quickly and when he did police say this same man sexually attacked 5 other people in The Bronx. He even tried to rape a homeless woman at ten in the morning. Okay. So in another case, a career criminal who was arrested three times in four months for serious crimes, including assault and aggravated harassment, skipped court. And when police finally found him and hauled him to court, Bragg's Bragg's office let him go in January of last year. Guess what he did when he got out? He murdered a woman.
TED Talks Daily
"harvard college" Discussed on TED Talks Daily
"Absolutely. The study started in 1938. And it started with two groups, a group of Harvard college undergrads, and it started with a group of inner city boys who were in elementary school or middle school from really disadvantaged troubled families. And each study was trying to look at how people can take healthy developmental paths. And so the idea was not to study what goes wrong in our lives, but what goes right in our lives. And some of the factors that contribute to helping things go well in human development. Needless to say, we started out with boys all males, but we've added women, we have more than half women now, and we've added the second generation. So we started out with 724 people. Now we have over 2000 people in our study and we're still collecting data today. Wow. And I know, in the book, you talk about how the advice you offer, the wisdom you offer, it's not just drawn from your own study because of some of what you suggested that you're just now starting to bring women and different generations. And I guess could you talk about some of the other gaps and why it's been important to also think about some of the other studies out there on life and happiness. Yes, that's a really good point because particularly in this kind of research, no single study is proof of anything, that what we want is for different studies of different populations. So different ethnic groups, different cultural groups, different geographies, right? We want different studies to point in the same direction. And that's why I'm here and I can tell you with confidence, many studies point to all these same benefits of relationships. And I know you touched on the health element in your talk and share that there is data that reveals that we have that there's a strong connection between happiness and health. And what have you specifically found related to happiness and health outcomes? What we find is that happiness turns out to make us age more slowly and keep us able longer so the diseases of aging that happen to all of us happen later, sometimes they don't happen at all in people who are happier, have a greater sense of well-being. And it's because of what I spoke about a few minutes ago, this kind of decrease in chronic inflammation in chronic stress. And so what we find is that we can't guarantee that any one person is going to stay happier or live longer. If they have better relationships, but we find that there are these ingredients, just like taking care of your health. Not smoking, not abusing alcohol or drugs, exercising, regularly getting regular healthcare, having access to healthcare, all of those things really matter for our health.
KCBS All News
"harvard college" Discussed on KCBS All News
"The mayor's community responders program kicks off. Their police cars posted on each of the four sides of Union Square on this December night, part of the plan we've been telling you about on Kay CBS to make shoppers feel safe this holiday season. There are also a whole lot of people walking around in orange jackets. City ambassadors. I ran into Robert almost as soon as I parked. My role is to walk around the city depending on the location they put us. And we just pretty much welcome people to San Francisco. Make sure they feel welcome. If you need help with directions, maybe the nearest restaurant, you know, recommend food places. Activities to see and stuff like that. And starting next month, mayor London breeds community responders program launches. Those people will tackle lower level problems that don't exactly call for the police. I responding to lower priority non medical and non emergency calls, which will also enable other public safety agencies to respond to other emergency situations in a timely manner. She says the goal is to have this team respond up to 100 non emergency non medical calls a week for the first two months. And we will be collecting data to track progress over time. To increase transparency and accountability on the outcomes of this pilot, our operating partners will be required to provide monthly reports to the department of emergency management. In Union Square Megan goldsby kcbs. News time, 8 22. Start 8, December 18th. When most people look at the glass plates preserved at Harvard college observatory, they see black dots, smears, and smudges. Astronomers see a chance to learn how the stars galaxies and clouds those markings represent have changed over the past century or longer An artist see the beauty of the universe and the hard work of the women who analyze the plates. The original plates are negatives. They show the stars in black and the background sky in white. At Harvard, women computers marked and labeled the astronomical objects in the images. They also measured the brightness of those objects and made many other notations. The plates have been scanned to make it easier for astronomers to find them. As part of that process, the handmade notations were erased, although all of the plates were photographed first, and some of the originals have been preserved. To commemorate the work of the women computers, artist Erika bloomenfeld created tracing luminaries. It's a set of 6 prints. She erased the stars, leaving only the written notations, which were hand layered with 24 karat gold. Leah halloran interpreted the plates themselves in your body is a space that sees. It's a series of prints depicting comets, galaxies, and other objects. The titles include the names of the women computers, including Henrietta leavitt, and Annie jump cannon. Two of the most important astronomers of the 20th century. We have sky watching tips and much more about the universe and start a magazine. The tales at starting dot org. For the University of Texas at Austin, McDonald observatory, I'm Billy Henry. I'd say 24 onto the money watch. I've grown a number of investors are cheering for Derek Jeter. The trading card industry would almost seem like it was a secret society. The former Yankee greats, arena club platform for trading cards, another
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Of North Carolina and Harvard college, several conservative justices suggested it had run its course, referring to the 2003 grutter decision in which justice Sandra Day O'Connor anticipated the use of racial preferences would no longer be necessary in 25 years. Here are chief justice John Roberts and justice Amy Coney Barrett. You don't think that university of North Carolina has to stop in 25 years in the 2028 mark. So what are you saying when you're up here in 2040? Are you still defending it? Like this is just indefinite. It's going to keep going on. I don't see how you can say that the program will ever end. Your position is that race matters because it's necessary for diversity, which is necessary for the sort of education you want. It's not going to stop mattering at some particular point. My guest is former United States solicitor general Gregory garr, a partner at Latham and Watkins. He won the landmark case of Fisher versus the University of Texas, which upheld the race conscious admissions program used by that university. Greg, looking at the legal analysis after the arguments, it seems that the almost universal conclusion was that the court is ready to throw out the consideration of race in college admissions. Did you come to that conclusion as well? I did. I mean, I think certainly based on the oral arguments, as the challengers had the upper hand and that's not surprising going in, but having said that, there's a lot that remains to be seen about how the court gets that result in how broadly it might go in these cases. During the arguments, there seemed to be a great focus on whether educational diversity can be achieved without the consideration of race specifically with race neutral approaches. Does that indicate that justices are on to the next step? I think that it means that they're focused very carefully on the application of strict scrutiny in this context in particular looking for narrow tailoring and the existence of race neutral alternatives. For some conservative justices, it may also mean simply illustrating that universities can achieve educational diversity in other ways without explicitly considering race as part of the admissions process. So I think different justices were looking at that issue through a different lenses. It seemed like the justices were deeply divided right down ideological lines. Well, generally speaking, there's a stark divide on the court in terms of how the justices look at this question of diversity and the interest in achieving diversity on college campuses and otherwise. And I think you saw that by the questioning that the justices had for the advocates. The more liberal justices obviously came at this issue from the perspective of there being a compelling interest in achieving diversity on college campuses and elsewhere and whether or not they were able to persuade their more conservative colleagues. I'm not sure, but certainly that was one of the more interesting interplays going on throughout the oral arguments and reflects the sort of stark divide that the justices have on this issue. You argue the Fisher case, of course, and the three jaws to who dissented the chief justice and justices Thomas and Alito are still on the court where they as stark in their questions and comments about using race to achieve diversity. Yes. Thank you from the standpoint of the more conservative justices, their position on this issue has been clear for some time and I think that's true of justice Thomas, although as I recall he did not ask questions during the Fisher argument, but certainly justice Alito. And even the chief justice who is more moderate in a number of areas, but in this area has been very outspoken against the consideration of race and admissions. There was a lot of discussion about students using their admission essays to talk about their experiences, for example, overcoming
77WABC Radio
"harvard college" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"That is the appendage of the Democrat National Committee. Brainwashing our children against their parents. Against their faith against their upbringing. Dumbing down our children, so they're more easily, indoctrinated, what is all this? Well, we know where it comes from. If I wanted to plot a way to destroy America, I would vote Democrat. If I wanted to destroy the nuclear family, I'd vote Democrat. If I wanted to destroy our private property rights and our market system, I would vote Democrat. If I want to destroy energy independence and impoverish the people so they turn on their economic system and they turn on their constitution, I would vote Democrat. If I want to drive up the cost of gasoline and home heating oil, limit its supply, make it more complicated and complex for people to live their lives. So again, they would turn on the constitution and the capitalist system. I'd vote Democrat. If I wanted to turn one American against another based solely on their skin pigmentation. I wrote Democrat. I wanted to destroy America. And have open borders. Where tens of thousands of young Americans are dying from fentanyl. Whether it's anarchy on our southern border. Where drug cartels find new cities to operate from within the United States. The more anarchy the better, the more chaos the better. Flowered and pivot overwhelm the system. Trash the local police undermine them, defund them the military impose social experimentation. On young people who sign up to protect the nation and turn one of those soldiers against another, again, based on their race. I would vote Democrat. I hated America, I would vote Democrat. Fire racist, I would vote Democrat. Democrat party is used race for its entire existence. Anti black racism and now anti white racism, anti Asian racism, from FDR to Harvard college. Racism. You heard me. Fire and anti semite. Defending Palestinian terrorists. Refusing to arrest and prosecute. Thugs. Attacking orthodox Jews in Brooklyn. Embracing Black Lives Matter and anti semitic anti American Marxist organization. If I felt that way, I vote Democrat. If I believe babies aren't babies, when the science tells me their babies, even to moments
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Case. In principle, this is a case about exemptions from anti discrimination law. And if I were arguing this to defend the Colorado anti discrimination provision, I would emphasize that this is not about gay rights, but if you allow exceptions from actually discrimination law for people who are opposed to gay rights or same sex marriage or whatever it is, then you need some good reason why you're not going to allow exceptions from race discrimination. Sex discrimination, veteran status discrimination. In that sense, this really isn't a gay rights case at all. It's a case of about whether people get to say that they don't like complying with some law because it violates either their religious principles or their expressive principles and whether you're going to allow that to undercut anti discrimination law. The last time this issue was up before them they ducked it in the masterpiece cake shop case by finding that there was subjective illicit motive to discriminate against religion. Here, I don't think it will be so easy to duck the case, but I do think that the case is main implications will go well beyond gay rights. And in that sense, I would think of it as a question more about the scope of free speech and precise and religion. And less about rights, although, of course, you could imagine the justices certainly just as Alito has hinted at this saying, well, it would be different if this were a race case because there's a compelling interest in overcoming race discrimination and maybe there isn't such an interest in overcoming bias against LGBTQ+ individuals. I think that would be a terrible mistake, but I could see them doing that. And in that case, I would say, well, then they've turned it into a gay rights case. There are two affirmative action cases coming before the justices challenging admission policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina, and several of the justices have expressed distrust or disapproval of the theory of affirmative action. Not just express distrust, I think that there are probably 6 votes on this court that includes chief justice Roberts, who has been pretty strong on this to say that
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Case. In principle, this is a case about exemptions from anti discrimination law. And if I were arguing this to defend the Colorado anti discrimination provision, I would emphasize that this is not about gay rights, but if you allow exceptions for actually discrimination law for people who are opposed to gay rights or same sex marriage or whatever it is, then you need some good reason why you're not going to allow exceptions from race discrimination. Sex discrimination, veterans, status discrimination. That in that sense, this really isn't a gay rights case at all. It's a case of about whether people get to say that they don't like complying with some law because it violates either their religious principles or their expressive principles and whether you're going to allow that to undercut anti discrimination law. The last time this issue was up before them, they ducked it in the masterpiece cake shop case by finding that there was subjective illicit motive to discriminate against religion. Here, I don't think it will be so easy to duck the case, but I do think that the case is main implications will go well beyond gay rights. And in that sense, I would think of it as a question more about the scope of free speech and pre exercise of religion. And less about rights, although, of course, you could imagine the justices certainly just as Alito has hinted at this saying, well, it would be different if this were a race case because there's a compelling interest in overcoming race discrimination and maybe there isn't such an interest in overcoming bias against LGBTQ+ individuals. I think that would be a terrible mistake, but I could see them doing that. And in that case, I would say, well, then they've turned it into a gay rights case. There are two affirmative action cases coming before the justices challenging admission policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina, and several of the justices have expressed distrust or disapproval of the theory of affirmative action. Not just express distrust, I think that there are probably 6 votes on this court that includes chief justice Roberts, who has been pretty strong on this to say that
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"In principle, this is a case about exemptions from anti discrimination law. And if I were arguing this to defend the Colorado anti discrimination provision, I would emphasize that this is not about gay rights, but if you allow exceptions for anti discrimination law for people who are opposed to gay rights or same sex marriage or whatever it is, then you need some good reason why you're not going to allow exceptions from race discrimination. Sex discrimination, veterans, status discrimination, that in that sense, this really isn't a gay rights case at all. It's a case of about whether people get to say that they don't like complying with some law because it violates either their religious principles or their expressive principles and whether you're going to allow that to undercut anti discrimination law. The last time this tissue was up before them they ducked it in the masterpiece cake shop case by finding that there was subjective illicit motive to discriminate against religion. Here, I don't think it will be so easy to duck the case, but I do think that the case is main implications will go well beyond gay rights. And in that sense, I would think of it as a question more about the scope of free speech and free exercise of religion. And less about, okay, right. Although, of course, you could imagine the justices certainly just as Alito has hinted at this saying, well, it would be different if this were a race case because there's a compelling interest in overcoming race discrimination and maybe there isn't such an interest in overcoming buyers against LGBTQ+ individuals. I think that would be a terrible mistake, but I could see them doing that. And in that case, I would say, well, then they've turned it into a gay rights case. There are two affirmative action cases coming before the justices challenging admission policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina, and several of the justices have expressed distrust or disapproval of the theory of affirmative action. Not just express distrust, I think that there are probably 6 votes on this court that includes chief justice Roberts, who has been pretty strong on this to say that the
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Case. In principle, this is a case about exemptions from anti discrimination law. And if I were arguing this to defend the Colorado anti discrimination provision, I would emphasize that this is not about gay rights, but if you allow exceptions for anti discrimination law for people who are opposed to gay rights or same sex marriage or whatever it is, then you need some good reason why you're not going to allow exceptions from race discrimination. Sex discrimination, veterans, status discrimination. That in that sense, this really isn't a gay rights case at all. It's a case of about whether people get to say that they don't like complying with some law because it violates either their religious principles or their expressive principles and whether you're going to allow that to undercut anti discrimination law. The last time this tissue was up before them, they ducked it in the masterpiece cake shop case by finding that there was subjective illicit motive to discriminate against religion. Here, I don't think it will be so easy to duck the case, but I do think that the case is main implications will go well beyond gay rights. And in that sense, I would think of it as a question more about the scope of free speech and pre exercise of religion. And less about gay rights, although, of course, you could imagine the justices certainly just as Alito has hinted at this saying, well, it would be different if this were a race case because there's a compelling interest in overcoming race discrimination and maybe there isn't such an interest in overcoming bias against LGBTQ+ individuals. I think that would be a terrible mistake, but I could see them doing that. And in that case, I would say, well, then they've turned it into a gay rights case. There are two affirmative action cases coming before the justices challenging admission policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina, and several of the justices have expressed distrust or disapproval of the theory of affirmative action. Not just express distrust, I think that there are probably 6 votes on this court that includes chief justice Roberts, who has been pretty strong on this to say that the
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The world need his advice He's a two time world champion debater and a former coach of the Australian national debating team and the Harvard college debating union Boston is a journalist and author from Australia by way of South Korea He overcame a significant language barrier to become one of the best in his field and now he reveals some of the tricks of the trade in his new book good arguments how debate teaches us to listen and be heard We're living at a time of really extraordinary polarization and it's easy in times like that to see disagreement as the source of our troubles And what I'm trying to suggest with this book is disagreements can be a force for good not only because they are useful in terms of finding out truths and ensuring people are hood and we can be honest and Frank and forthright with each other But more importantly because good arguments what good democracies are they're good work they're what good workplaces are what good families are that we despite our differences resolved to live together and instead of ignoring our differences to put them in conversation with one another with the hope that we might be able to get somewhere deeper somewhere better somewhere richer than we might be able to on our own So my hope with this book is to restore people's confidence in what disagreements can do and hopefully to give them a few skills that are going to allow them to handle them a little bit better too I think that one thing that keeps people back from expressing disagreement in the workplace is perhaps the way that we interpret how other people are going to take that disagreement The idea of people taking conflict personally So but what's a good way to how should people express themselves in a way where they get to that better place by disagreeing with one another I think that's a really important question And debate is such a big part of the workplace now isn't it Because the nature of modern white collar work is just we sit around in meetings and disagree all day And I think the book gives a few different pieces of advice for someone in that situation I think the first is you want to be really clear what the disagreement is about As soon as that kind of imprecision about what the conversation is about it tends to become unruly and it tends to bring in personality It tends to bring in all the things that has happened in the past So the first thing I would say is every disagreement starts with an act of agreement and that's often about what the discussion is about The next thing that I would add is you want to have the kind of rules that we started our conversation with So in competitive debate you know that everybody gets equal time in which to speak they're not interrupted while they're speaking and they're given turns so that when I speak and I give you a chance to speak there's no need for me to interrupt because I know I'm going to get a turn back Is a big part of this too is that there doesn't have to be a winner or a loser Absolutely And you know one of the things that you learn as a competitive debate is wins and losses are temporary you know just the way it is in the workplace you might take the W in this particular conversation or a loss in this particular conversation But your coworkers aren't going anywhere right And so they're going to be back the next day or the next week the next month with a different issue where you're all going to be on different sides Sometimes allied sometimes on opposing sides So I think the real lesson in addition to taking seriously the need sometimes to prevail in arguments and to stick up for yourself and to carry a message is to recognize what we all need is a set of rules a set of practices that allows us to keep the conversation going in the long term And for the betterment of our organizations and for the betterment of ourselves I have to you know I think about presidential debates or political debates Do you watch them and you say well this isn't a debate This is just a show No seriously right People don't have a chance to kind of say things There's constantly somebody jumping in and that's not a debate or is it I think that's exactly right I don't think they are debates And something isn't a debate just because it's called a debate or because two people are standing at an awkward distance from each other at different podiums right And I think often what happens in those debates is one or more of the participants turns what would otherwise be a debate into a kind of a brawl And it becomes really important in those moments to pause as you said at the top of the program to say to identify what is happening to name the kinds of tactics that are being used whether it be name calling and something like that And to say is it a debate that we're having or is it something else Because without that kind of a check what begins as a debate can devolve into something worse And we see that not only on the presidential stage but we see that around the kitchen table and with our families and our loved ones and we see it at workplaces all the time That's journalist and author both so on His new book good arguments had debate teaches us to listen and be heard It's out now You're listening to Bloomberg businessweek and if you missed any of it or you want to hear the.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Get in Now more than 40 years after first considering affirmative action The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases that could mean the end of race conscious admissions The case is challenging the admissions policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina seek to overturn decades of Supreme Court precedent that allow universities to consider race in helping to create a diverse student body Joining me is Audrey Anderson who heads the higher education practice at basque berry and Sims What was your reaction to the court taking up affirmative action Were you surprised concerned unfazed Well I wasn't surprised that they granted review of the cases because some of the steps they've taken along the way They ask for the views of the solicitor general One is the United States government's views in the case which is one clue that they're interested in the issue And then they had actually looked at the petition at more than one of their conferences So for two weeks in a row they had considered the petition So when they granted it I was not at all surprised I am concerned for the longevity of affirmative action in college admission given that they have now granted review of the case but we will see what happens So the first circuit affirmed the decision for Harvard's admissions process And the fourth circuit hasn't decided the university of North Carolina case yet So there was no split in the circuits which often leads the Supreme Court to step in Is the Supreme Court sort of jumping the gun This is an unusual circumstance for them to be granting review of the case Usually the court would not grant review where there was no split in authority And that's one of the reasons why I'm concerned about the longevity of affirmative action There really is no good reason to grant review here unless at least four members and likely 5 members of the court think that the decisions below are incorrect and they want to overturn them That's the only reason that they would grant review of these cases Audrey the Supreme Court has weighed in several times on affirmative action Where does its doctrine stand now Well right now it is legal constitutional for universities to consider race in their admissions program As long as they are doing so for the purposes of diversity in their programs to get the educational benefits of a diverse student body and as long as they do it in a way that is narrowly tailored to furthering that interest So right now that is legal and constitutional The problem is that there's been a change in the Supreme Court since the court last looked at that question in 2016 And the changes in the justice is on the court Lead many of us to believe that the court today might come to a different conclusion than it did in 2016 So in the 2003 decision justice Sandra Day O'Connor predicted that racial preferences would no longer be necessary in 25 years was affirmative action always seen as a temporary measure a stopgap I think that many of us have an aspiration that there will be a day that race is not an important factor about people in our society that there will be a day when we don't need to consider race in order to level the playing field But many of us the day that justice O'Connor wrote that thought that 25 years is a little bit optimistic And I think that many of us today think that it really was overly optimistic to think that 6 years from now grace will not be an important factor that still needs to be considered Let's talk about the arguments in the case What's the argument being made for race neutral admissions And what are the schools arguments against it The main argument that the people challenging affirmative action are making them in their petitions to the Supreme Court is that this law that I just told you about that's been governing college admissions since 1978 actually in the bakke decision which came before the 2003 Michigan decision But that law is wrong that the constitution requires schools to admit students in a color blind fashion that the constitution requires governmental actors and those receiving federal funds to make decisions in a color blind way And to do anything else really violates the constitution That is their number one argument And it is an argument that is very persuasive to a number of members of the current Supreme Court From a legal perspective on the other side there are many who believe that the Fourteenth Amendment when you look at its history and the context of what was happening at that time was very much meant to protect the rights and further the rights of black people in America who had just left the institution of slavery And so a color blind constitution was never the idea of the framers It was never the idea of the members of Congress who passed the Fourteenth Amendment at that time And so there is room for a limited consideration of race in this aspect of society And the schools here want a diverse student body Is that what's behind the admissions process here Yes So what the schools want to have is a student body that is widely diverse and diverse with all kinds of characteristics in mind but one of those characteristics they want to have diversity on is great And in order to meet the current legal standard they have to show that they are unable to attain a racially diverse student body without considering race that they have considered and used race neutral means of trying to get racial diversity by doing recruiting effort by considering socioeconomic circumstances by other means And that still doesn't get the racial diversity that they want to have in their student bodies to give their students the educational benefit of learning and living in a racially diverse environment I know we're a long way from a decision in these cases but you're feeling seems to be that the justices may get rid of affirmative action I go in with the assumption that there are 5.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Grosso from Bloomberg radio The consideration of race and college admissions has always been controversial and often misunderstood as in a scene from the movie dear white people Hey look you guys still got affirmative action That's all I'm saying I'm sorry What exactly are you doing here All right check this out You ready Obama right Leader of the free world He gets into Harvard based on you too late Affirmative action You know he's not president right now No The guy who didn't get in Now more than 40 years after first considering affirmative action The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases that could mean the end of race conscious admissions The case is challenging the admissions policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina seek to overturn decades of Supreme Court precedent that allow universities to consider race in helping to create a diverse student body Joining me is Audrey Anderson who heads the higher education practice at bass berry and Sims What was your reaction to the court taking up affirmative action Were you surprised concerned unfazed Well I wasn't surprised that they granted review of the cases because some of the steps they've taken along the way They ask for the views of the solicitor general One is in the United States government's views in the case which is one clue that they're interested in the issue And then they had actually looked at the petition at more than one of their conferences So for two weeks in a row they had considered the petitions So when they granted it I was not at all surprised I am concerned for the longevity of affirmative action in college admission given that they have now granted review of the case but we will see what happens So the first circuit affirmed the decision for Harvard's admissions process And the fourth circuit hasn't decided the university of North Carolina case yet So there was no split in the circuits which often leads to Supreme Court to step in Is the Supreme Court sort of jumping the gun This isn't unusual circumstance for them to be granting review of the case Usually the court would not grant review where there was no split in authority And that's one of the reasons why I'm concerned about the longevity of affirmative action There really is no good reason to grant review here unless at least four members and likely 5 members of the court think that the decisions below are incorrect and they want to overturn them That's the only reason that they would grant review of these cases Audrey the Supreme Court has weighed in several times on affirmative action Where does its doctrine stand now Well right now it is legal constitutional for universities to consider race in their admissions program As long as they are doing so for the purposes of diversity in their programs to get the educational benefits of a diverse student body and as long as they do it in a way that is narrowly tailored to furthering that interest So right now that is legal and constitutional The problem is that there's been a change in the Supreme Court since the court last looked at that question in 2016 And the changes in the justice is on the court Lead many of us to believe that the court today might come to a different conclusion than it did in 2016 So in the 2003 decision justice Sandra Day O'Connor predicted that racial preferences would no longer be necessary in 25 years was affirmative action always seen as a temporary measure a stopgap I think that many of us have an aspiration that there will be a day that race is not an important factor about people in our society that there will be a day when we don't need to consider race in order to level the playing field but many of us the day that justice O'Connor wrote that thought that 25 years is a little bit optimistic And I think that many of us today think that it really was overly optimistic to think that 6 years from now grace will not be an important factor that still needs to be considered Let's talk about the arguments in the case What's the argument being made for race neutral admissions And what are the schools arguments against it The main argument that the people challenging affirmative action are making in their petitions to the Supreme Court is that this law that I just told you about that's been governing college admissions since 1978 actually in the bakke decision which came before the 2003 Michigan decision But that law is wrong that the constitution requires schools to admit students in a color blind fashion that the constitution requires governmental actors and those receiving federal funds to make decisions in a color blind way and to do anything else really violates the constitution That is their number one argument And it is an argument that is very persuasive to a number of members of the current Supreme Court From a legal perspective on the other side there are many who believe that the Fourteenth Amendment when you look at its history and the context of what was happening at that time was very much meant to protect the rights and further the rights of black people in America who had just left the institution of slavery And so a color blind constitution was never the idea of the framers It was never the idea of the members of Congress who passed the Fourteenth Amendment at that time And so there is room for limited consideration of race in this aspect of society And the schools here want a diverse student body Is that what's behind the admissions process here Yes So what the schools want to have is a student body that is widely diverse and diverse with all kinds of characteristics in mind but one of those characteristics they want to have diversity on is right And in order to meet the current legal standard they have to show that they are unable to attain a racially diverse student body without considering race that they have considered and used race neutral means of trying to get racial diversity by doing recruiting effort by considering socioeconomic circumstances by other means And that still doesn't get the racial diversity that they want to have in their student bodies to give their students the educational benefit of learning and living in a racially diverse environment I know we're a long way from a decision in these cases but you're feeling seems to be that the justices may get rid of affirmative action I go in with the assumption that there are 5.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"harvard college" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"And college admissions has always been controversial and often misunderstood as in a scene from the movie dear white people Hey look you guys still got affirmative action That's all I'm saying I'm sorry What exactly are you doing here All right check this out You ready Obama right Leader of the free world He gets into Harvard based on you Too late Affirmative action You know he's not president right now No The guy who didn't get in Now more than 40 years after first considering affirmative action the Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases that could mean the end of race conscious admissions The cases challenging the admissions policies at Harvard college and the university of North Carolina seek to overturn decades of Supreme Court precedent that allow universities to consider race in helping to create a diverse student body Joining me is Audrey Anderson who heads the higher education practice at bass berry and Sims First what was your reaction to the court taking up affirmative action Were you surprised concerned unfazed Well I wasn't surprised that they granted review of the cases because some of the steps they've taken along the way They asked for the views of the solicitor general One is in the United States government's views in the case which is one clue that they're interested in the issue And then they had actually looked at the petition at more than one of their conferences So for two weeks in a row they had considered the petitions So when they granted it I was not at all surprised I am concerned for the longevity of affirmative action in college admission given that they have now granted review of the case but we will see what happens So the first circuit affirmed the decision for Harvard's admissions process And the fourth circuit hasn't decided the university of North Carolina case yet So there was no split in the circuits which often leads to Supreme Court to step in Is the Supreme Court sort of jumping the gun This is an unusual circumstance for them to be granting review of the case Usually the court would not grant review where there was no split in authority And that's one of the reasons why I'm concerned about the longevity of affirmative action There really is no good reason to grant review here unless at least four members and likely 5 members of the court think that the decisions below are incorrect and they want to overturn them That's the only reason that they would grant review of these cases The Supreme Court has weighed in several times on affirmative action Where does the Supreme Court doctrine stand now Well right now it is legal constitutional for universities to consider race in their admissions program as long as they are doing so for the purposes of diversity in their programs to get the educational benefits of a diverse student body and as long as they do it in a way that is narrowly tailored to furthering that interest So right now that is legal and constitutional The problem is is that there's been a change in the Supreme Court since the court last looked at that question in 2016 And the changes in the justice is on the court Lead many of us to believe that the court today might come to a different conclusion than it did in 2016 So in the 2003 decision justice Sandra Day O'Connor predicted that racial preferences would no longer be necessary in 25 years was affirmative action always seen as a temporary measure a stopgap I think that many of us have an aspiration that there will be a day that race is not an important factor about people in our society that there will be a day when we don't need to consider race in order to level the playing field But many of us the day that justice O'Connor wrote that thought that 25 years is a little bit optimistic And I think that many of us today think that it really was overly optimistic to think that 6 years from now or 5 years from now brace will not be an important factor that still needs to be considered Let's talk about the arguments in the case What's the argument being made for race neutral admissions and what are the schools arguments against it Well the main argument that the people challenging affirmative action are making in their petitions to the Supreme Court is that this law that I just told you about that's been governing college admissions since 1978 actually in the bakke decision which came before the 2003 Michigan decision But that law is wrong that the constitution requires schools to admit students in a color blind fashion that the constitution requires governmental actors and those receiving federal funds to make decisions in a color blind way and to do anything else really violates the constitution That is their number one argument and it is an argument that is very persuasive to a number of members of the current Supreme Court Coming up next we'll look at when and how the justices might rule the case You're listening to Bloomberg You could save big when you bundle your home and auto with progressive But when we just come out and say it it feels like it falls a bit flat So instead we're going to have someone else say it because for some reason when a random person.
The Tim Ferriss Show
"harvard college" Discussed on The Tim Ferriss Show
"Both tried consulting group and sheila heen on linked in sheila. Welcome to the show. I am so delighted to be here. I thought we would start with the ford of difficult conversations. Which is written by roger. Fisher could you please describe for us. Who roger was. Oh golly how can. I capture for your listeners. Who roger was. Roger was just incredibly inspirational person so he fought in world war two and he was in both the atlantic and the pacific theaters. You're actually a weatherman. So they would send up a plane. They didn't have weather satellites rates so they send up a weather plane to check out the weather over germany and that were they radio back to say whether you should send out the mission. Being in the air force during world war two was not a super survivable place to be. And when roger came back from the war he found that he had lost several college roommate's friends. He was the only one who came home in his immediate social circle if you go to memorial church on the harvard college campus. The walls are etched with names of harvard students and graduates so some of them didn't graduate before they died who have died in service of our country and it would be fascinating just to stand there and talk with him. He would point two names and say all. This guy was so funny. This guy was just the most generous person i ever met. And i think that that experience really motivated the rest of his life. He came back and dedicated his life to trying to find better ways for us to manage conflict in the world and his passion was international relations. Right so he would sit down and read the paper in the morning. The newspaper of course was how we got our news back even when i turned up on the scene in the in the nineties and he would find a conflict and he was just start working on it and then he would fax his advice off to the involvement faxes from some guy named roger who who had some kind of interesting ideas so every once in a while someone would call him back and that's how he got involved in border. Disputes between peru and ecuador town got involved in south africa with the anc and the white government just before the constitutional talks tug on bolton ireland. And it's also how he came to write getting to yes. Which is the negotiation book. That really became a foundation book in the field of negotiation and conflict resolution. So you mentioned entering the scene. How did you enter the scene. With respect to negotiation and conflict resolution. I grew up in iowa. Nebraska and a series of sort of serendipitous accidents. I ended up at occidental college in california for college. In when i was applying to law school ultimately i was trying to decide whether whether to stanford or harvard because of course they didn't get into yale which is true of almost every person who's listening to this podcast. We all have that in common and one of my college advisors said to me. Harvard is the bigger and scarier choice. I hear you saying but they have this negotiation thing. And i just have an instinct that it might be up your alley and probably partly because it was the bigger and scarier thing but also because i felt he knew me pretty well. I decided to come to harvard. I didn't know anybody and of course he was writing. I took negotiation my very first year of law school and just fell in love with the field. I thought wow. I could learn something new every day for the rest of my life. What did you love about it. I think partly that it was so interdisciplinary. So we're trying to understand something. We're reaching in all directions behavioral economics neuroscience psychology social psychology. You're really reaching in all directions..
Stuff You Missed in History Class
"harvard college" Discussed on Stuff You Missed in History Class
"Life. It's a weekly dose of in your face unfiltered chelsea. Oh i've never wanted to be a mom. But i could kill it as a divorce. A dad with insights and balance from brandon. Along the way and brandon is like my little sidecar aren't you. I'm just here for moral support in a different perspective at times. Yeah he's more reasonable than i am so you might wanna listen to what he says. Listen to dear chelsea on the iheartradio app apple podcasts. Or wherever you get your podcasts fleming died on may twenty first nine hundred eleven at the age of fifty four and any jump cannon. Was the obvious choice to succeed her as the curator of astronomical photographs at harvard college observatory but this proved to be controversial. Even though fleming had served in that role for more than a decade harvard president abbott lawrence lowell called her hiring under his predecessor. Charles eliot quote anomalous lull. Did not expect this anomaly. To be repeated he was not expecting another woman to be hired to replace her so pickering placed cannon in this position anyway. Although this wasn't a formal appointment through the university so that made her pay was lower than it would have been otherwise and her name was not listed in the harvard directory as curator of astronomical photographs. Cannon took over work on the henry draper catalogue stellar spectra building on the earlier work of meena.
Green Connections Radio - Insights on Innovation, Sustainability, Clean Energy, Leadership, Entrepreneurship, and Careers w Top Leaders, Women
"harvard college" Discussed on Green Connections Radio - Insights on Innovation, Sustainability, Clean Energy, Leadership, Entrepreneurship, and Careers w Top Leaders, Women
"Performance through transparency and innovation close quote it created supports and advances. What they call the hp d. open standard to facilitate accurate reliable and consistent reporting of building product content and associated health information prior to joining hp. Wendy was a senior executive with both intel and motorola where she led a variety of businesses in the computer hardware software and systems industries and was part of leadership teams developing open industry standards. She's also a software engineer by training. Wendy earned her bachelor's degree from harvard college her mba from northwestern university and was a doctoral candidate at harvard. Business school so welcome to green caxtons radio wendy and thank you for joining us. It's great to be here joan. Thank you for having me. Oh you're welcome. You're welcome so. I think the first thing i want to ask you is when you heard about the collapse of the surf side building. What did you think about in addition to Compassion for the human loss. But where did the building executive brain and you go. Well i mean first of all obviously our hearts went out to all of those affected and you know the absolute trauma of an event like that and immediately. My thoughts went to the issues that you have raised in your introduction so the components of these buildings and what we know about them and as you said the hp open standard is an innovation that we have brought into the industry of the building industry starting about ten years ago so that at least one of the elements of this doesn't answer all the questions that that you phrase but it is really focused on one key component. Which is the chemical composition of building products and health information about those. How do those chemical constituents of building product interact with or fact human and wore environmental health. And what what do we know about that now. This is an evolving field. What we're trying to do is create a standard methodology that enables manufacturers easily to report that information people like architects designers and others who select.
Nonprofits Are Messy: Lessons in Leadership | Fundraising | Board Development | Communications
Making Beautiful Music With Community-Driven Partnerships
"Henry donahue is the executive director of save the music a national nonprofit that helps students schools and communities reach their full potential through the power of making music prior to save the music. Henry was the ceo and head of partnerships at purpose a digital strategy and creative agency that focuses on social impact projects. Notable clients included every town for gun safety the aclu oxfam international. The ford foundation nike. I- kia audi and liverpool f c. Henry has also worked as a media. Executive focused on digital product development is held senior positions at discover conde nast primedia and lendingtree dot com spent most of the nineteen nineties on the road across the usa as a fundraiser for political candidates including us senators. Jay rockefeller from west virginia. And ron wyden from oregon at the same time. He was playing guitar in an indie rock band and running into small independent record label. Henry has an abbey in american history from harvard college and an mba from darden graduate school of business at the university of virginia henry. Great to have you with us. Sharing the story of save the music and the lessons contained within the be here could see joe thanks. Hey i'm delighted to have you. So why don't we start sharing with our listeners. The origin story of save the music. What was the germ of its mission and tell us a little bit about the journey. Yeah i mean safe. The music's mission and vision are the same today as they were back. joni urine. John sykes aretha franklin one. Dvd's categories aretha flying sleep dion and Every student every public schools should be making music as part of their education. I think you had a great overview of why at the intro. We know for decades of research that when schools have music students do better. The school does better. The community does better In normal times. I travel all around the country even in the toughest schools when you get to that band room or that choir room. You know. it's that joy and inspiration and hope for the future and all those things. So i i love going to high schools middle schools elementary schools. I love interacting advanced features van kits. It's amazing the landscape out there. Is that most schools in the. Us do have music as part of their school day. there's a quote for geoffrey canada That i'm sure i'm angling but it's something to the effect of if you wanna see what a quality education looks like. Look what rich people do about. Eighty percent of american schools have music and art as part of their school day And the programs that caught over the years. And we're we do. Most of our work are in schools that serve black students immigrant students and in rural rural students as well. What do you love about your job. Henry donahue because you loved this i love so it you you mentioned. I mean i've worked in politics and advocacy and social impact in various ways for for a long time You know at purpose Which some of your listeners might be familiar with worked on gun safety. We worked on marriage. Equality we worked on A project involving immigrants and You know the fight for the fifteen dollars minimum wage. All of which were were were deeply deeply satisfying. But when chris mccarthy who's the guy runs. mtv now came to me in we had this conversation about the h. one. Save the music which five six years ago you know still had a very solid sort of core group of program team people working there doing amazing work but has sort of been what i call know an orphan corporate asset on. Cbs empire. You know. I was presented with the opportunity to do the thing that i did for my job. Which was you know corporate impact strategy advocacy and combined with the thing that i spent my whole life in love with which which is music. Which by the way you. You don't have the benefit of seeing henry. But i do. And i see a keyboard. And i see a guitar so yeah. This is a music guy. You're a. You're a an advocate Andrew musician and you get to do both in the same job. That's pretty awesome. Yeah i think this is sort of at the core of was eighth. music does Which is i remember myself as a pretty angry and somewhat directionless
WBSM 1420
"harvard college" Discussed on WBSM 1420
"Yes. I think you lost a few bucks today, didn't you? Taylor, you gotta you gotta you can't you can't sell in the depths. You gotta sell it the highs, There's gonna be dips, all right? Okay. 844 542 42. So you heard the Charlie Parker the stupid things, he said. The stupid thing, he said today, right? Let's hear it. Let's hear it again. His prediction. Ted. The forecast is predicting a pretty big dump. That's a pretty dumb thing to say, right? He went to high school, Needham High School. Then he went to Harvard College with a guy named Phil Murphy, who's now the governor of New Jersey, and they really do March tandem. Whether it's the you know the rate of nursing home deaths, 12 Rate of overall deaths. They go 123 with New York. S o today. Murphy had the issue his own stupid statement. Here's here was his statement. Teach is what he tweeted out today is a zoo Blizzard hit jersey their little ahead, obviously because it's or Lena is roaring up from the south. Remember? Cove. It will not take a snow day. If you're heading out today or tomorrow to help your neighbors shovel, please remember to stay safe. Where a mask. How many cases of covert transmissions during snow shoveling do we have on record governor? Murphy. No. One Here's a Here's a response. No one is going to catch covert 19 and die this year from shoveling their elderly neighbor Snow, But some people will sadly suffer crack cardiac vets from struggling, slushy heavy snow on their sidewalks. It's hard enough to breathe when you're moving the white stuff and sucking and cold air, adding a tight fitting mask to the mix is like likely a really, really bad idea for anyone who was already at high risk. From this sort of unusual, strenuous physical activity. No virtue, singling is more important to some New Jersey instead, their health Exercise your common sense and ignore this jackass for the duration of the blizzard boy that describes the two of them from NATO high class is 75. Harvard College 79. Care of jackasses. It's being unfairly jackasses. I guess. The forecast is predicting Really big, dumb. Mike, You're next with Howie Carr. Go ahead, Mike. Hey, how we, uh you know what a high one of the beauty of free markets is. If you don't like that, the red guys drove up the price of game Stop. You know you can do You could stay out of the market. Yeah. Or you can short.
WBZ NewsRadio 1030
"harvard college" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030
"First openly transgender person appointed to a federal position for me, is a very proud transgender woman. It's it's huge. It's a huge accomplishment. Dr. Levin's career path started with degrees from Harvard College into Lane School of Medicine and Sylvania State representative Jeff Pile made a derogatory post about Dr Levin on Social Media. He eventually took it down and then did issue an apology. 6 51, let's go to the slopes. Hi, I'm Charlie Ross with the WBZ ski report. It's one of those colder days. So take the extra steps to stay warm while you're getting ready for the slopes. And when you're on the slopes nearby, why choose that? With the action on two dozen trails, Waterville Valley jumped it up to four dozen slopes. They got another few inches of fresh snow just before the weekend. Black Mountain Jackson, New Hampshire added Train up to a dozen slopes 15 inches of fresh snow in the last seven days. Stratton got another five inches before the weekend more than 3 ft in the last week in Vermont. I'm Charlie Ross for WBZ Boston's news radio. WBZ 10 31 of 7.9 82 available everywhere with the I Heart radio app. Number one for podcasting and on hundreds of devices like Alexa, Google Home X Box and Sona telling you BZ, Boston's news radio and I Heart radio station. Hello, Beautiful. I'm in near it. Founder of Madison Reed Ah hair color company I named after my daughter. We've heard from thousands of women about their color and the number one question is how to find the right shape with Madison Reed. We guarantee a perfect shade match or your money back. It's easy. He take her online color quiz to determine your perfect shade. See yourself in your best shape with our online. Try on tour or call our license colorist seven days a week are ammonia free hair color delivers gorgeous, soft, shiny, multi dimensional, healthy looking hair with 100% great coverage. Enjoy two great ways to get Madison Reed hair color, visited Madison re Color Bar or shop Madison Dash three dot com and get 10%. Off, plus free shipping on your first color. Key use code Boston. That's code Boston. Try it. Love it. That's the beauty of Madison Reed..
What Fresh Hell: Laughing in the Face of Motherhood
Fresh Take: Dr. Edward Hallowell on Renaming and Reframing ADHD
"Book is all about sort of what's new in the field. Just the first thing. That's new in the book. Is we give the condition a new name. the name when i first learned about it in nineteen eighty one was called attention deficit disorder and then in the nineties. They threw in the eight so then it became attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. And you know those are all out of the medical model which is rooted in pathology. You know you go to the doctor not because you feel well but because you feel bad. So it only stands to reason that medically based conditions would have a pathology slanted name so and that's fine but when it comes to this condition it's totally inaccurate and it also conveys a kind of stigma kind of shame kind of feeling less than and those are very damaging so it's more than just cosmetic it's more than just a semantics really gets right to the heart and mean you get this diagnosis. You're told you or your child has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. And you feel like you've just been punched in the gut. You don't really know what it means but you know it's bad sounds bad so it must be. Yeah exactly and so the fact is the description is inaccurate. We have the condition myself. So i say we don't have a deficit of attention quite the opposite. We have an abundance of attention. Our problem is to control it and then the disorder. I don't see it as a disorder you know. I went to harvard college and medical school. I've written twenty one books. I've been married thirty one years. I've got three wonderful kids. That i don't have a disorder. I have a brain difference. And so i see it as a trait. If you manage it properly it becomes an asset. If you don't yes it can ruin your life so it has the potential to be a disorder but it also has the potential to be a superpower and so we've renamed it very abol attention stimulus trait vast via st and. I think it's a whole lot better to be told that your son or daughter or you have vast because it does imply the vast nature of this condition which is all encompassing and does not convey a sense of shame in pathology the way. Adhd does so and attention and stimulus of sort of the two key elements. you know. Our attention is always moving and so we have variable attention and then stimulus were always looking for high stimulation. we're always looking for something to pump. Up the volume. So variable attention. Stimulus trait vast. And we offer that as a way of for parents to convey to their kids they have avast mind. They have vast potential. They have vast opportunity all of which is true. And then the challenge to turn this. Trait asset is to learn to control attention stimulation so the first item in the book that we offer. That's new is the very word itself. Very term itself the acronym via st. I think it also brings us past what i think. Amy and i probably grew up with learning this term. Add and it's become this kind of major catchall for every range of behavior and then a lot of the discussions around are kind of like. Oh that's an. Add moment or everyone's medicating what used to be called childhood and those kind of discussions. That i think are not useful for anybody because they demonize kids who have maybe need help functioning and then they kind of lump everybody together in like this used to be childhood now. Everyone's just medicating zombies not true right. Not true at all and also as you say when it's used casually it's never complimentary exactly when you say he's so. Add he so creative original interesting and dynamic. You mean he's a pain in the butt you know and so you know we want to take it out of that stigmatized round where it does not deserve to be in. The fact of the matter is most of the people who are the game changers in this world have vast or adhd.
WBZ Midday News
Boston - Harvard College Adopts Universal Satisfactory-Unsatisfactory Grading for Spring 2020 Due to Coronavirus | News
"Oh five a new grading system for local college I'm Deborah Rodriguez as college kids make the switch to online classes Harvard University is giving them a break with an asterisk all undergrads will receive grades of either emergency satisfactory or emergency unsatisfactory this week university president Lawrence Baker and his wife tested positive for the coronavirus the decision to implement a new grading system follows two weeks of very heated debate among undergrads about how Harvard should adjust his grading policies to accommodate students negatively impacted by the corona virus pandemic some students believe the new grading system unfairly
Outcomes Rocket
Helping Underserved Patients Get the Quality Specialty Care They Need with Daren Anderson, Director at ConferMED
"I have the privilege of hosting Dr Darren Anderson. He's a director of confirm. Darren is a board certified general internist and has worked in safety net practices for his entire career. He's published articles in several peer reviewed medical journals including health affairs. The American Journal of Managed Care The Journal of Family Practice and the Journal of General Internal Medicine Doctor. Anderson obtained his undergraduate degree at Harvard College and his Medical Degree from Columbia University College of physician and surgeons. He's an outstanding contributor to the telehealth space. We've got a lot of things going on right now. Value-based cares one of those things. How do we deliver better on? Our healthcare dollar. Corona virus is something that's very live and and and a concern for many of our provider organizations and communities and so today we're going to touch on several of those things with Darren and also to learn more about what he and his company are doing to to add value to healthcare so Dr Anderson. Really appreciate you jumping on to join us today. Oh thank you. I really appreciate the chance to talk with you in the share. Some of the work we've been doing with your audience. Thanks a lot for the opportunity absolutely so tell us a little bit more about your journey and and what inspired your work in healthcare and in particular your focus on safety net practices yet will journey released her back in college. I was trying to figure out what I wanted to do with my lights. Give the short version. But I I became really inspired by more that I was reading By various authors talking about Underserved patients and their efforts to try to provide healthcare in safety practices. And I kind of decided early on that. I wanted to turn it for your that. Would allow me to to work in a medical in the safety net. So really went through my training with that. As a goal in after MED school did an internal medicine residency training and then went right into the National Health Service Corps where I was assigned to practice saw in a new Britain Connecticut Community Center. That's how he ended up in Connecticut which is to stay and you know. I started off working fulltime as a primary care doctor taken care of by an inner city population with a lot of a lot of complex problems. Most of my patients spoke Spanish in. I think early on even in my first year actes. I absolutely love taking care of patients but I was so struck even even having fun in knowing a little bit about What was going on in in Satanic Practices? I was struck by how inequitable the system was and healthcare. Quality is something that just greets you the minute you walk into an exam realized the opportunities that you may have right may have private insurance. The opportunities that are patients who have no insurance or perhaps Medicaid insurance don't have and so sort of starting charting career win. It took me more into the administrative research side of things looking to try to derive solutions to help reduce helping it make sure that patients regardless of where they were born what language they spoke or what insurance. They did or didn't have finding ways to make sure that they got the best health care that we provide in the US. I think that's That's wonderful baron. As we as we consider the topic of access and the challenges that surround that social determinants of health much of which were tackling. I think more seriously today in healthcare. I think this is a great opportunity for for us to to dive in a little bit. Deeper on on what you're doing at complimented Ellis. What it is that you guys are doing there to add value to the healthcare ecosystem. You know so one of the most striking and obvious disparities when you start practicing in in a federally house. Hendrick Community Health Center is when you need to send a patient. See a specialist so many may knowing your audience may know that there is a network of over twelve hundred community health centers across the country. They're called federally qualified health centers but they are independent nonprofit L. centers that are run by a board of directors that's majority controlled by patients in these clinics. Had been around for decades and really developing a strong effective primary care infrastructure. They were among the earliest without the. Hr's the SIM that I worked at. Has KIOSK CHECK INS integrated behavioral health? Many of the things that you would like in expect to see in the in the the best primary care clinic you could envision but it all comes to a screeching halt when you refer somebody or need to refer somebody actress in back in two thousand twelve when we first about the idea for what eventually became confirming. Mike Clinic was facing nine to twelve month. Wait minimum to get one of our Medicaid patients into be seen by the pitas dermatologists in pretty much. All of the specialties. Have at least some degree of a delay and this presents a real challenge for the primary care provider. You may have a pretty good idea of what you need to do. But you may not be sure you may need surgery. You may need a biopsy procedure but in any case off the only way to get answers to your questions or get a patient to have procedure disturb. Refer them into a specialty center and No unfortunately uninsured patients and and even those with Medicaid have great difficulty finding specialty care because the simple fact is reimbursement rates relatively low in many most specialists impact on limit or completely. Don't accept it. All patients without insurance or Medicaid and so forth that presented a really substantial challenge to us and that was that was the issue that we sought to address. Confirm it and that's a that's great so comes from a from a frustration that you had in your own practice and your patients not being able to get the care that they needed. I mean nine to twelve months. Wade is is really not acceptable. And so you dove in you. Roll up your sleeves. Tell us what confident does today? That's different than what's available today to solve on that specialist problem so I think we tested in the process that ultimately became for mid was designed and tested by me and my team of primary care providers nurses referral coordinators. And basically. What confirm it does is it allows the primary care provider to confer with a specialist virtually before they refer in a synchronous conferring dwell so died essentially it allows the primary care provider to send their question in some of the details about the case from the medical records to a special instant. They can get is on that console question rapidly and in no more than two days that most of our specialists on a within the same day. Seventy seven percent responded on the same day. The question was submitted. And they're able to put ice on that review the information that we submit and send back to that Primary Care Provider Advice Guidance. So basically what? We are as virtual network specialists around the country. That are on standby ready to answer. Questions in take a first look at all of the console requests that the primary care providers have in pretty much any specialty in his rebuilt out that network and developed really the understanding state by state of all the different types of Payments Environments. All the different types of practices. We continue to see that. A substantial percentage of the cases that get submitted to us in most specialties upwards of eighty percent. Don't need a face to face visit. It's not because it's inappropriate. Consult of the. Pcp made a mistake it simply because the nature of what the primary care provider is asking. The question that they have is one of the specialists answered by senior question reviewing the data and sending back in opinion and so what that does makes the system more efficient it allows those cases that can mean be maintained managed primary care same primary care. Unit allows those scarce resources that face to face visits to be allocated to patients who really need a procedure or hands on for some reason another and that's basically we met all that outdid series of studies in Connecticut. Utah in our health center to prove that it works that it was safe and what confirmed has done is take that scale and we're now providing that service to over one point three million patients across the country. That's fantastic congratulations on on the scaling of it To the point you've gotten it thus far Dr Anderson and and You know thinking through the the efficiency that this provides much of what we need in in healthcare is is the logistics and the efficiency. And and so you've created a nice fast lane to provide the care that's needed and eighty percent. Don't need that face to face visit and I think that's A great solution. So what's the cost than if somebody if it specialists is giving you a their idea or their analysis of the of the patient. What's the cost? The cost is way less than the cost of that specialised in their time in their overhead. Seeing the patient face to face meetings to think about it we batch leads. They're an inbox in the specialist and review them imaging patients evening in rattled off a significant number of them one after the other most e console responses. Take ten minutes out. There's arranged and we have. We have some units are averages tend to fifty minutes but if you think about it all they need is a laptop or whatever to do that office cost. There's no checking medical assistant. Any of the overhead costs the
Coming Out Stories
Ed's Coming Out Story
"Ed so far. So now he's the editor in chief of mine about world. Gay Travel magazine well. He grew up in Boston. I interviewed him in a coffee shop in New York City. Just in case you're wondering what the background noise was. Well I think like a lot of people I probably questioned it. When I was quite young I remember at age. Five in six thinking. Oh I'm a little different from other people. I like dolls. I like things that my either boys don't seem to like so. I kind of started questioning things early early on. Did you worry about it at age or did you just sort of go with it with adult playing? I did actually worry about it. I thought about it and I think you have to think about at age. Five or six someone. Having to consider such job ponders weighty essential question. What does it duty at neurons right. I mean I think kind of in it probably helps hurts. I think it hurts gay. People in some ways it makes can make them neurotic but I think it helps gay people in the sense that you're firing synopsis that you probably normally wouldn't use for ten twenty years really so gay people having to think okay do do. Why hide this? Imagine at age five or six thinking I think I have to hide this from people. I know the only people like my parents like so you start thinking about gays in their ability to lend in act you know. Be Creative around how they present themselves. I just think I mean it's a long answer to question but yeah I did think about it quite a bit when I was younger and I kind of knew that it was quite wrong or wouldn't be accepted. So did you modify your behavior. Then did you try not play with dolls. Yeah I mean I. There was a moment I know I remember when I felt free and I was just doing whatever I wanted. And whether it was playing with dolls hanging out with girls whatever and just but then I realized that people askance at that so I had to modify behavior so yeah very early on. I joined every sport imaginable that my parents wanted me to join basketball baseball football and I happened to be good at a lot of them. Unfortunately so I was stuck in there every time I want to quit. The coach would call that kind of thing so it was kind of annoying in that sense but yeah I kind of tried to blend in as much as I could the other problem or maybe curse and blessing that I was always ahead of all my other peers in school in my grade so might have five brothers and sisters all of whom have multiple degrees written books. All this has happened so very smart group of people but even in that group I excelled beyond a lot of people. They weren't necessarily criticizing me for being effeminate or gay or but it was a little bit of like you know you gotta you got one hundred years. Smart TEACHER'S PET. Everyone likes you know so. I I think I suffered more because of the perceived intellectual superiority either already being bullied. Yeah never bullet was actually never bully knock on wood. I had muscle in my feeling like the free brought through straight brothers and two sisters and everyone there was never any bullying of any one of US really. We all went to a tiny little small Catholic school so I had the same twenty five fellow students more or less for eight years so in that environment. You people aren't allowed to bully are believed. It just doesn't happen. The nuns were very strict. So Luckily I've avoided all that okay. But this isn't boasted Ryan and matching. That's quite a fairly progressive city. Yeah yes and no I mean at the time especially I you know. I'm fifty now so that was quite a while ago and Boston has had deserved reputation for being super racist especially the Irish against every other every everyone else and there was a cover of Time magazine. Were like there was like this terrible bussing. Incident were blacks. Were being bussed into white neighborhoods and there was a huge from revolt by white people against it was pretty ugly. So Boston has a really strong history of Ugly racism and homophobia alongside there's the intellectual aspect of educational systems the progressive women who were early supporters of suffrage or the Boston. A revolution took place in part in Boston. So there's always those strains and when you think about gay marriage the first place gay marriages was permitted legally permitted was Massachusetts right. And you think Oh. That's a progressive. Not really it's actually kind of conservative. Marriage is a conservative institution so in a weird way. Massachusetts is progressive and conservative at the same time. It's hard to describe so gay people gay people who would walk around like. Oh yes my partner. And I we live in the south and we have a place in providence hand and we have a car and we have a dog and this is the perfect light so it was almost as that precipice heterosexuality but in reality a lot of times. Those perfect relationships weren't so perfect. So there's this attitude that you have to appear to others how you want to be perceived that doesn't happen in New York and San Francisco and other places so Boston is unique in that sense. So what was your personal coming out like? They must be the time when you thought I can't hide this any longer. I'm GONNA tell people. Yeah absolutely so I was saying earlier. I've had having five brothers and sisters in shoe parents and living abroad and doing all of a sudden I've had a long series of coming coming out and I think you just keep coming through your whole life. You sitting on an airplane in the past. The guy next to you is like what do you do is like on the editor in Chief of a gay travel magazine? You've just come out so I just roll my eyes. I get my business card. It's like Oh my God. Can I not escape this but but I was in college? I went to Harvard College and it was a very supportive environment even though in the eighties. It wasn't that supportive outside. I was in a bubble. I didn't really. I don't think I realized that came to my friends and a lot of people were coming out at that point in the eighties and so it was very quickly accepted and I came up to my sister. And she's like you're the second person who came up to me this week. Our best friend came up to her that that same week and so he and I ended up dating and she was so pissed off but so a lot of weird like it was completely fine but then after I left college I moved to France and it wasn't that accepted there my partner. His grandmother really hated me because she thought corrupted her son because she was old fashioned and my parents didn't councils much later. My brothers and sisters. I waited until they were a certain age and maturity level and I came up one after the next five to ten years. Much more five say didn't communicate with each other. I'm sure they did. I'm sure they all my direct coming out to them. I thought that was important to do for each one of them so I try to do that. And then you know my first job. The one of the bosses was gay so that was kind of easy for me to come out so the first one is in college when I kind of just I remember being in the shower and just thinking i. I've tried to date. Girls just is not working had a girlfriend at the time. She was at Yale and she turned out to be less. Call to the gay man generator because she three guys she dated. I'll turn gay. I was like boy honey yet. Crank on the mound very funny but it was convenient for me to have a girlfriend in a different city right. I mean obviously so I just thought it was very intellectual the way it did it was like it was like a switch was flipped flicked a switch. And that's it I'm gay and that's kind of how I I don't I deal with things you know. That's how it happened so revelatory moment in the shower that's like. What were you doing in the shower contemplating my life and I was like you know happy doing really well at Harvard. Had A lotta great friends but fundamentally unhappy well why well there was a disconnect between the person I was and then the person I was everyone else I wasn't signed. No one knew that person inside I thought and I thought well I want to bridge those differences. I want my friends who are so amazing so supportive to also know this part about me and it was maybe a little bit easier because I two friends who are just like shoe forward out ballsy gay guys just unapologetically gay and I liked that unapologetic aspect of it. I was talking to kind of had to apologize for being gay. But they kind of taught me. And this one William from Iowa from a small town Iowa like population five thousand a rural community but his parents are super progressive so he came up when he was wow to them in Iowa and they supported him when he was my friend in college. I thought if he can do it. I can do it in Boston at Harvard and Cambridge Massachusetts. For God's sake so. He was like one of my role models in the eighties to be gay and young in. Boston was a blast. The Club Scene. Superfund there were mixed men and women. Queer whatever. It was a really fun. Time to be gazed. So I gotTa Kinda got a lot of the fun and then of course AIDS kind of blew up everything but But it was a good moment for a while there so I felt supported and I felt like I could come out to a very positive reception and indeed. That was true. And then what about when you did confront So I I was living in France in Paris with my then partner for five years. The French guy and people visiting my sister Paris. My sister came back and said to my parents. Living with this guy. He's I think he's gay so they kind of out of me so I wrote a letter. It was like before emails. I wrote them a letter then when it came back to visit at Christmas. Confront me and my father was a funny super supportive away. He's Italian school because like my boss is gay. I you know he goes. I think people shouldn't be bullied. They shouldn't be discriminated against. I think it's terrible. I hear about a physical assault against gay people. I just didn't want in the family so it was a little bit of like the old fashioned Italian thing and my mother was just like you know the first word in AIDS is acquired. You can get you can get aids from anyone so she was more concerned for my health. And so I said I was overly intellectual with them and I didn't allow them really time to kind of catch up but I basically had my responses prepared for both but that was how it came out thirty years later. Whatever it is if they are the most unbelievable supportive you can possibly imagine. What was it like sitting down writing that letter? It was hard I mean. I knew that they loved Jerome. And so I knew that the thing about being anti-gay was very kind of general but the specific aspect of it. They really liked Jerome. And so when my father said when we really liked and he goes we don't want people in the house is to be set aside. I said well you don't want out every single one of my friends that they had invited to the house. I said you don't want Sabrina. Don't want Richard. You don't want Chris you don't want and I just made this whole long list. Said you don't want any of them back in the House. And they think they knew that it was ridiculous to say that they didn't want them in hospice. They really like these people but yeah the letter was hard to write. But it's actually easier to write a letter in some ways to talk to someone in person it's going to go and then you wait for the bombshell to happen. You wait for the response so it was interesting. It wasn't an email wasn't like quick. It was a couple of weeks had passed so good. Oh that's a good question. I should ask them. God bless them. They'RE IN THEIR LATE EIGHTIES. Kick in the doing great so yeah frame someone. I know I think they probably ripped it up and burn but they. They're interesting if a gay bashing occurred in. New York my dad call me making sure I was okay of course but also just to say you know express his revulsion towards that and his the horror that they felt about that you know they're really incredibly supportive.
Stansberry Investor Hour
The Biggest Bubble in World History?
"The rant. This week is continuation of last week. Okay what i've done here is. I've added kind of another chapter to the story story so last week. I talked to you about the way that wall street turns conservative investment vehicles into pure toxic waste is what i'm calling colleague and i mentioned two examples right. The investment trusts starting in the late nineteenth century ending in the nineteen twenty nine crash and the u._s. thirty year mortgage around the time of the financial crisis. You know maybe from around two thousand two through just say two thousand nine this week. I wanna talk a little bit about mutual funds in that same light okay and the story begins with something called the prudent prudent man ruling of eighteen thirty. We're getting in the weeds here folks. There's a lot of material here all right so the prudent man fiduciary the tradition in american well in american law and in american finance goes back couple of hundred years before the nineteen sixties when when and mutual funds kind of blew up in the way that i'm about to describe but there was this one particular decision in eighteen thirty in a case called harvard college versus amory sorry you can google that and and learn the details of that amac and talk about just mention the a quote from the decision that was made at that time so so here's the quote from a decision which outlined the prudent man rule okay so these are the words of judge samuel putnam in eighteen eighteen thirty quote all that can be required of a trustee is that he shall conduct himself faithfully and exercise a sound discretion and he is to observe how men of prudence discretion and intelligence manage their own affairs not in regard to speculation but in regard to the permanent ah position of their funds considering the probable income as well as the probable safety of the capital to be invested and quote. That's a lot of that's a lot of stuff there but the salient points are prudence discretion intelligence probable income probable safety of the capital title so this is what's known as the prudent man rule it still alive today though you'd probably be hard pressed to find very many true practitioners. The decision was made in a boston court. Okay it became the ruling principle of among others a whole class of money managers that will called the yankee trustees they were the living essence of the prudent man rule and they viewed the avoidance of losses as more important than achieving leaving gains right very conservative so in boston almost one hundred years after the prudent man ruling the first open ended mutual fund was created in nineteen twenty four and it was very much a product of the trustee culture right people who took care of trusts and were these the yankee trustees who used the man ruin invested very conservatively it was called the massachusetts investors trust and it was different because it didn't have a fixed the number of shares like all the funds before it it's sold shares to the public based on demand and investors could sell them right back to the company at whatever the current price was right. That's an open and mutual fund as we know today so as a product of the boston prudent man culture it was so conservatively run it came out in nineteen twenty four right just when the twenties were kinda getting getting cooking and it was seen as being out of step with the times sort of like warren buffett in nineteen ninety nine fine and you know it it did all kinds of things issued detailed quarterly reports listing all of its holdings and transactions and costs that was the exact opposite visit policy of at that time the the new investment trusts of the era which refused tell investors what was in them in turn out as we said last week to be toxic waste okay now you fast forward a little bit you go nineteen forty-three edward crosby johnson. The second is a lawyer who takes over the fidelity fund and fidelity right. The company knows fidelity. It's got like two and a half trillion of assets under management today well. He took over this boston. Mutual fund operation called fidelity fidelity at the time. They managed three million bucks. It was hardly anything that was even a small amount of that time in nineteen forty three now in his book the gogo years author author john brooks noted of that event quote the man who turned the fidelity organization over to him refuse to take nickel for it in keeping with the traditional boston austin concept of a trusteeship as a sacred charge rather than a vested interest to be bought and sold and quote brooks looks continued the notion of a mutual fund as a trust was deeply ingrained in state street sort of like wall street and boston deeply ingrained in stay street st st st at that time and would remain so until about nineteen fifty five in quote so the laws governing mutual funds and trust were different but until the the mid fifties according to brooks mutual funds felt like trusts right it wasn't seen as an opportunity to get rich speculating with other people's money far from it. It was a sacred charge so but johnson you know eventually. He left those old conservative ways behind. It's a necessary step in solving the toxic waste. He was a fan of jesse. Livermore johnson love jesse livermore. That's what got him interested in. The stock market to begin with of course livermore was the famous trader who made lost i i if i'm not mistaken for fortune speculating on stocks you know including in the twenties and eventually shot himself in the head nineteen forty in the cloakroom grooming sherry netherlands hotel in new york so with his one transaction of taking over the fidelity fund the old conservative way of the yankee trustee was kinda taken out back and shot in the head johnson grew the business by trading stocks okay now the dow rose about one hundred and fifty percent between nineteen forty-three the year he took over and nineteen fifty two the year johnson met a man named gerald cy who's a chinese fellow his last name aside t._s._a. Sign was born in shanghai china in nineteen. Twenty eight came to the u._s. In nineteen forty seven to go to college got a bachelor master's degree from boston in university and stuck around so these guys met nineteen fifty two and they were both inclined more towards market timing and rapid-fire trading in large positions positions you know no diversification long-term view neither had a trace of the prudent man in him johnson. Let size start his own fund in nineteen fifty seven the fidelity capital fund. I'm sorry i left outside went to work for johnson when they met okay and he started his own fund in nineteen fifty seven the fidelity eddie capital fund from nineteen fifty eight to nineteen sixty five the fund return two hundred ninety six percent according to john moguls forward to a book called super money by adam smith breath aka george goodman good book. You should read those those adam smith books along the way si- had to deal with the crash nineteen sixty two that year the dow jones average fell twenty seven percent and most of the downward move which was really from kind of january first until june twenty six of that year most of that downward and move happened in two months between april twenty fourth june twenty six with a drop of twenty two and a half percent so is short and sharp and kind of brutal john brooks. It's not how well the mutual fund industry weathered the storm quote the great rising giant of american finance the mutual fund industry had come out with honors cash chevy still conservatively managed in the prudent fiduciary tradition the funds had bought unbalancing the falling market of monday and had sold on balance and the rising market of thursday day thus besides protecting their shareholders from excessive risk. They had perhaps actually done something to stabilize the market and quote. Apparently there's one particularly if you look at the chart of that time there's one particular week those pretty brutal right around the time it bottomed out and i think that's what he's talking about. Their size fidelity capital fund was down by may of that year but he recovered and the fun rose sixty eight percent in the last three months of the year okay so a few years later nineteen sixty five big year for gerald outside that year has fun was up almost fifty percent of course the turnover one hundred twenty percent right so turnover of one hundred percent means. You held everything for a year. Basically like you sold every share you bought that year so he sold one hundred twenty percent implies and even shorter period right so one hundred percent turnover would be if you bought on january first sold on december thirty first every share and this one hundred twenty percent is like i don't i don't know maybe he sold it all by by november. Let's just say but really what what happened was. He's just constantly turning over daily by then by nineteen nineteen sixty-five gerald saone twenty percent of fidelity instead of picking is his successor to run fidelity et johnson picked his son ned johnson then who actually was a pretty good stock quicker to write in a bull market. Everybody looks good. Silence fidelity immediately started his own fund called the manhattan fund. It started with around two hundred forty seven million in assets the quote the biggest offering an investment company history end quote according to the new york times by mid sixty st eight. It had five hundred sixty million bucks in it. The fun didn't do so well that year though and si- sold his company to c._n._a. Financial corporation regime for thirty million. He got out of the top pretty smart a year later. It fell ninety percent that was closed <hes> so by december thirty thirty one thousand nine hundred seventy four near the bottom of brutal bear market. The manhattan fund had these single worst eight year track record of any existing fund at the time accumulative would've loss of seventy percent of all the capital that had gone into it while manhattan fund wasn't the only one there were other kind of gogo funds of the year. I remember one called. The enterprise fund was up like six hundred percent at the top and down by more than half or so at the bottom but cy was the most famous money manager of time he was really the first kind of celebrity financial major financial guy he would later lie to an institutional investor magazine interviewer when he said quote we had one bad year in nineteen sixty eight night been killed in the press ever since. I don't think it's fair dr and quote one bad year. How about the worst eight years ever at that time size gruden end there. He later worked for an insurance company that bought american can a tin can manufacturer and he turned that business into a financial services company called primerica. You may have heard of it primerica which he sold to a guy named sanford weill in nineteen eighty eight. It's the company that became came city group okay short short story there from primerica to citi group so you know size fingerprints are still on american finance today so that's the short version of how ed johnson and even more so gerald cy turn mutual funds you know this thing born out of the conservative a bit of boston yankee trustee culture into they turned it into toxic wastes into these rapid fire trading vehicles in in in the nineteen fifties and sixties so mutual funds began life in america as a conservatively managed sacred dacre charge of the prudent man the yankee trustee and they ended up as the new gogo mutual funds of gerald site irritating huge positions in highly speculative stocks trading in and out quickly and size manhattan fund was just the most famous and most disastrous example but there there were others said and you know they took these huge positions they weren't diversified and the brokers hated it but they couldn't not do it. Because <hes> you know cy was a big deal. He was the biggest thing in finance at that time that two hundred and forty seven million deal right that was the biggest deal is like fifteen percent of all the offerings that year in mutual fund so you know it was the brokers had to deal with them. They had to play along with these huge positions that he was taking even though they didn't like it because it looked dangerous to them <hes> and trade in out very quickly. It's just like the investment trust of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and it's just like what they did into the thirty year mortgage with mortgage-backed securities and c._d._o.'s in the housing bubbles it housing bubble singular really have one of those wall street takes these conservative vehicles and turns them into toxic waste. Every year is a little bit different. Every bubble has its own characteristics characteristics and course today. What are we seeing today the very biggest bubble in the history of the world the global bond bubble label featuring at last count according to data compiled on bloomberg. They keep track of it. If you have bloomberg you can you can log in and get the latest chart art of the world's negative yielding debt. It's over sixteen trillion about sixteen point four trillion according to bloomberg it's insane. It can't end well. These things things never ever ever do the thing that worries me about this and of course i have to give credit where it's due wall street had less to do with this than central bank central banks did this when this on them of course they're clearly taking a page. I don't know did wall street. Take a page from them. Wall street was around before central banks right so <hes> at least before the federal reserve's early so i think we we have to say that <hes> the central banks take a page from wall street and turned you know the conservative -servative thing most of the negative yielding data sovereign debt and they've turned it into toxic waste guaranteed to lose you money if you hold it to maturity pretty insane insane. That's the rant for this week if you liked it or didn't like it or have a question or a comment right into feedback back at investor our dot com.
TED Radio Hour
Do people get happier as they get older?
"There's research that shows that as a rule people get happier as they get older. Dr Robert Waldinger clinical professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School is sixty five by the way. Absolutely. And for years and years. He says science had no way to explain what doors lessening was talking about. That is why many people get happier as they get older. Yes. Because trying to do a study tracking the entire scope of a human life is actually a really hard thing to do. Right. They're really hard to do. They take tremendous persistence. A funding is always about to dry up. The investigators get distracted there. So many reasons why most most longitudinal studies fall apart before the ten year Mark, which is why it's so. Amazing that since the nineteen thirties. A group of scientists at Harvard led most recently by rubber Waldinger have been working on something called the Harvard study of adult development, and it's the longest study of adult life ever done detailed systematic study of seven hundred men over seventy five years of life looking at every aspect of their health, physical health, mental health work life relationship functioning, and then as people have gotten older, aging retirement and all in an effort to figure out what was it again. It was originally the Harvard part was funded by W T grant, the department store magnate because he wanted to know what the characteristics were that made for good department store managers. Wow. That was that was his interest in funding future department store managers. He was man. Okay. But after that the study went on and on and eventually became what it is today. Seventy eight years later and unprecedented source of scientific wisdom about what it takes to thrive in old age rubber Waldinger described the study and its results on the Ted stage since nineteen thirty eight. We've tracked the lives of two groups of men the first group started in the study when they were soft Moore's at Harvard college they all finished college during World War Two. And then most went off to serve in the war. And the second group that we've followed was a group of boys from Boston's poorest neighborhoods. Most lived in tenements many without hot and cold running water to get the clearest picture of these lives. We interview them in their living rooms, we get their medical records from their doctors, we draw their blood. We scan their brains. We talked to their children. We videotape them talking with their wives about their deepest concerns and win about a decade ago. We finally asked the wives if they would join us as members of the study, many of the women said, you know, it's about time. So what have we learned from the tens of thousands of pages of information that we've generated on these lives?