Episode 769: Speed Dating For Economists

Economists have a yearly job market that works a little bit like speed dating.

Gary Waters/Getty Images/Ikon Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Gary Waters/Getty Images/Ikon Images

About 1,800 economics graduate students converged on the chilly Chicago streets in early January. Some of them ran through those streets, trying to get to the next hotel on time.

They were trying to find a job.

At some point in time, the economics profession decided it was going to create a job market unlike any other. They were going to create a system that is the most efficient job market imaginable.

Every year, universities and companies that want to hire a professional economist converge on Chicago in the dead of winter. They set up shop in hotel rooms across the city. Every young economist who wants their first job shows up, ready for a make or break weekend of intense questioning.

Interviews are squeezed back to back, often conducted in hotel rooms. Sometimes, interviewees have to run to make their next appointment.

And that’s just the start.

Today on the show, finding the perfect job takes a lot of time and a lot of money. And economists hate wasting both of those things. So they created their own hyper-efficient, optimized job market.

Music: “El Gringo,””Desperate Nights” & “Future Satisfaction.” Find us: Twitter/ Facebook.

Subscribe to our show on Apple Podcasts or PocketCast.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Would You Wear Lonzo Ball's $495 Shoes? 'Nah,' Twitter Says Politely

The soul behind the soles: former UCLA star — and potential NBA star — Lonzo Ball.

Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images

Surely you’ve heard by now: Sports as we know it has changed forever.

Go on, take a second if you need it. We’ll wait here — but while we’re at it, we’ll leave this little reminder for the laggards who haven’t heard what struck the decisive blow.

The Sports World is Forever Changed. Introducing Lonzo’s 1st Signature Shoe: The ZO2 Prime. pic.twitter.com/5JN1OLxlZS

— Big Baller Brand (@bigballerbrand) May 4, 2017

Yup: a pair of shoes. A $495 pair of shoes. Fronted by a college freshman who helped lead his team to the Sweet 16 in the 2017 NCAA tournament.

Or, if you’d prefer, you can select the $995 pair and get Lonzo Ball’s John Hancock scrawled in gold right there on the shoe — though be forewarned, it remains unclear how much that pair changed the sports world, or for how long.

Independence is Beautiful. We are proud to present the ZO2 Wet.
.
.
.
Signed By Lonzo | LED Box Included pic.twitter.com/OnaUCLlLZQ

— Big Baller Brand (@bigballerbrand) May 4, 2017

The premium-priced footwear dropped Thursday afternoon, unveiled by his father LaVar Ball’s punningly named Big Baller Brand just about a month and a half before the NBA Draft, where the younger Ball is widely hyped to be one of the top selections.

It follows, then, that Ball also enjoys his fair share of hype as one of the NBA’s top rookies-to-be. His future at the professional level is so bright, it practically shines like polished hardwood. In fact, it’s possible he could very well be the next Lebron James or Stephen Curry (whose signature sneakers, by the way, top out at about $175 and $100, respectively).

When balanced against that future, $495 seems like a steal … right?

Right?

Guys?

Mike Brown says he won’t be buying LaVar Ball’s $500 signature LO2’s…or his $200 pair of flip flops pic.twitter.com/HZwhGchwBA

— KNBR (@KNBR) May 5, 2017

OK, well, sure — Mike Brown coaches the Golden State Warriors, a championship contender that’s not going to get the lofty draft position needed to nab Ball for its roster. Perhaps he’s just jealous.

What does everyone else have to say?

Hey @Lavarbigballer real big baller brands don’t over charge kids for shoes. pic.twitter.com/N2U0VPXXyt

— SHAQ (@SHAQ) May 4, 2017

Lonzo Ball’s shoes r $495/if he plays in the @NBA like he did vs BBN De’Aaron Fox they’ll go for $4.95 @darrenrovellhttps://t.co/hz6em0rqu1

— Dick Vitale (@DickieV) May 5, 2017

Lonzo Ball’s shoes in 6 months: pic.twitter.com/3WPDabYfuN

— Just Me. (@NoThoughtsHere) May 5, 2017

Lonzo Ball reveals his new shoe for $500 pic.twitter.com/0TH5o6j8YL

— Tom Brazy 🇭🇹 (@Chuck__Says) May 4, 2017

Asked Friday why the shoe costs what it does, LaVar told ESPN Radio’s The Dan Le Batard Show the matter was simple: “I figure that’s what the shoe is worth,” he said. “When you are your own owner you can come up with any price you want.”

ESPN reports that the Balls, who marketed the shoes themselves, were turned down by Nike, Adidas and Under Armour after the elder Ball declined standard endorsement deals.

Still, they remain confident the shoes will earn a respectable return — and they’re not alone in thinking the prices aren’t as bad an idea as some on social media would have you believe. After all, if we discarded everything Twitter showered with snark, it’s tough to tell what in the world we’d even have left.

Probably not these $220 sandals, at least.

& Lastly, The ZO2 Slide. pic.twitter.com/gyzHscfA3w

— Big Baller Brand (@bigballerbrand) May 4, 2017

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

States Consider Legislation To Protect Free Speech On Campus

Vice Media co-founder and conservative speaker Gavin McInnes reads a speech written by Ann Coulter to a crowd during a conservative rally in Berkeley, Calif., on April 27. Coulter canceled a planned appearance at the University of California, Berkeley, saying she had lost the backing of the groups that had sponsored her talk.

Josh Edelson /AFP/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Josh Edelson /AFP/Getty Images

On college campuses, outrage over provocative speakers sometimes turns violent.

It’s becoming a pattern on campuses around the country. A speaker is invited, often by a conservative student group. Other students oppose the speaker, and maybe they protest. If the speech happens, the speaker is heckled. Sometimes there’s violence.

In other cases — as with conservative commentator Ann Coulter at the University of California, Berkeley, last week — the event is called off.

Now, a handful of states, including Illinois, Tennessee, Colorado and Arizona have passed or introduced legislation designed to prevent these incidents from happening. The bills differ from state to state, but they’re generally based on a model written by the Goldwater Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Arizona.

The model bill would require public universities to remain neutral on political issues, prevent them from disinviting speakers, and impose penalties for students and others who interfere with these speakers.

Attorney Jim Manley, who co-wrote the bill, says the institutional neutrality provision serves as a reminder to public universities that they are funded by taxpayers, who shouldn’t be forced to subsidize speech that they disagree with. He says the other provisions are important because the students who have engaged in these protests have not been adequately disciplined by universities.

“We think those are incredibly important because what we’ve seen is that universities haven’t really taken this seriously and discipline students who engage in these sorts of belligerent protests that are designed not to present an alternative viewpoint, but to shut down the speaker,” Manley says.

In a Wall Street Journal column, Stanford University Professor Peter Berkowitz echoes this point by arguing universities are slow to shut down these protests because they often want to protect minority groups who may be offended by a provocative speaker.

“The yawning gap between universities’ role as citadels of free inquiry and the ugly reality of campus censorship is often the fault of administrators who share the progressive belief that universities must restrict speech to protect the sensitivities of minorities and women,” Berkowitz writes. “They often capitulate to the loudest and angriest demonstrators just to get controversies off the front page.”

The goal of this model bill is to protect free speech on campus broadly, Manley says, so it provides protections for both invited speakers and students who want to protest. He says the discipline provisions work by shutting down those activities that are designed to prevent an exchange of ideas.

“If I started yelling every time you asked a question, that wouldn’t be a very good way to have a conversation,” Manley says. “And that’s basically what’s happening with these shout downs and violent protests on campus, and those are the sorts of things that our bill goes after and tries to prevent.”

North Carolina is one of the states considering a campus free speech bill, but State Rep. Verla Insko, a Democrat, criticized the legislation as an unnecessary “regulation of a constitutional right.”

Manley says the legislature’s job is to protect constitutional rights, which is what this bill is designed to do. He argues collaboration between legislatures and universities is needed to protect free speech on campus.

“Even if the university is a doing a fine job today, that doesn’t mean that there’s no role for the legislature to play here,” he says. “And if the university is truly committed to protecting free expression, then it should be a collaborative exercise between the legislature and the university to create a piece of legislation that works for everybody.”

Critics say this kind of legislation could hinder a university’s ability to regulate hate speech on campus, and Manley says this is possible because hate speech is not well-defined in the law.

“The point of having free speech protection in the Constitution is to protect unpopular ideas,” Manley says. “We don’t need the First Amendment for ideas that everybody agrees with. We need to protect minority views, even if those views are repugnant to most people, and maybe especially if those views are repugnant.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

In North Korea's Capital, More Abundance Than Expected In Everyday Life

North Koreans walk in downtown Pyongyang, North Korea, on April 18.

Wong Maye-E/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Wong Maye-E/AP

North Korea now has its own version of Spam in grocery stores. In the capital, Pyongyang, at least, everyone has a smartphone — or two.

These are some of the things journalist Jean Lee didn’t see five years ago when she opened the Associated Press bureau in the capital of the impoverished and isolated country.

Now a global fellow at the Wilson Center, Lee was invited to travel to North Korea this week to attend a medical conference in Pyongyang and follow a team of Korean-American surgeons.

With the backdrop of tense relations between North Korea and the U.S., Lee spoke with All Things Considered from Pyongyang about what life is like in the North Korean capital these days.

On North Koreans’ reactions to political tensions with the U.S.

It’s amazingly calm. You would be surprised at how calm things are here, and I have to say, that like most North Koreans, I’ve been largely cut off from the screaming headlines that we’ve been seeing. I didn’t have Internet access for several days. And, as you probably know, most North Koreans don’t have Internet access. They get their news from their own state media, so unless they read about it in their own state media, or see it on the evening news, they’re not very aware of it.

To be honest, it’s remarkable, we are not seeing people who are preparing for war. They’ve had a month, really, of some big anniversaries. They celebrated May Day. I did go to a May Day celebration in the park, where they were singing and dancing and drinking.

But they’re getting ready now for a busy season of rice planting in May, so they’re gearing up for that. They are completely unfazed, it seems, by all the rhetoric that we’re hearing overseas.

North Koreans wave as they march next to a float display of models of different missiles across Kim Il Sung Square during a military parade to celebrate the 105th birth anniversary of Kim Il Sung in Pyongyang on April 15.

Wong Maye-E/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Wong Maye-E/AP

On what has changed since Lee’s last trip to North Korea

I have to point out that I’ve only been in Pyongyang, which is the showcase capital. This is a city of elites, and so I’m only getting that side of the picture. It’s like only going to Manhattan, rather than seeing the rest of the United States.

That said, it’s surprising given what we hear about the sanctions how things have progressed. Everybody has a smartphone — sometimes two. Everybody is on their phones. They’re all playing video games. They’re doing what we do with our cellphones as well, they’re checking the news, messaging their friends.

There’s quite a bit more English, which is interesting. English is the main language that children learn here. There’s certainly a lot more cars, which is surprising given the concern about fuel shortages.

I did some shopping today … and it’s just amazing the kinds of products that they have on the shelves. [That] certainly wasn’t the case when I started coming to North Korea. So, in some ways, life has improved for the people of Pyongyang.

That said, I think that things are still incredibly difficult in the countryside. They have a chronic food shortage and that’s only going to get worse of course with the tightened sanctions.

On the wide variety of products available in local stores

I saw so many varieties of potato chips, varieties of canned goods, what would be their equivalent of Spam, for example, but all kinds of things — computers, tablets, PCs — all kinds of things that you might not expect to see in a country that is still very poor.

On the recent detention of a Korean-American professor

I’m certainly familiar with [the case of Tony Kim]. As a Korean-American this is something that anyone who comes here on a regular basis would be paying attention to.

But the North Koreans didn’t hear about it until earlier this week when it was reported in their state media. So it certainly was something that we discussed as a group with our North Korean guides, was the first that they had heard about it. And we don’t really have a lot of details and so we’ll certainly be waiting and watching to see what he is being accused of.

They have a very, very exhaustive penal code, and it is very easy to break those laws, and that’s what makes being here dangerous for anyone.

All Things Considered producer Matt Ozug and digital producer Maureen Pao contributed to this report.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Minnesota's Gordy the goat rescued from kidnappers

St. Paul Police Department pose with captured goat named Gordy that was stolen from Indian Mounds Park in Minnesota, U.S. on May 5, 2017. St. Paul Police Department/Handout via

REUTERS

Call it a ‘kid’-napping.

When St. Paul, Minnesota, police early Friday searched a GMC Yukon Denali that had crashed following a chase, they found an unlikely victim in the cargo area.

Four people fled the sports-utility vehicle, but Gordy the goat was found lying down with an orange electrical cord around his neck.

Police said Gordy had been abducted at Indian Mounds Park from a herd of goats that had been rented by the St. Paul Parks and Recreation department. Their job: To eat invasive plants on a difficult-to-reach bluff along the Mississippi River.

It was the St. Paul Police Department’s first known case of goat-thieving, said spokesman Steve Linders. The motive is still a mystery.

“I wish I knew,” said Clare Cloyd, a spokeswoman from St. Paul Parks and Recreation, which was only three days into its experiment with the goat herd when the theft occurred.

Linders said two 29-year-old men were arrested on potential charges of gross misdemeanor theft and fleeing police.

Gordy was returned unharmed to the park. Some of his herd had escaped through a damaged fence and were rounded up, according to park officials. Since then, a police Facebook post about the incident has gotten an usual amount of attention with comments like “stealing really gets my goat.”

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; Editing by Andrew Hay)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Octogenarian New Jersey ex-con politician to revive burlesque act

An octogenarian former New Jersey deputy mayor who once thrilled audiences as burlesque star Hope Diamond plans to sparkle again in the role next week at a charity event – though at her age she plans to keep her clothes on.

Three years after being released from prison following a bribery conviction, former Jersey City Deputy Mayor Leona Beldini is headed back to the stage on Thursday to raise funds for the Kennedy Dancers, a non-profit dance company, which announced the event on its website.

Now a grandmother, Beldini intends to dazzle crowds when she revives her burlesque persona Hope Diamond at the Jersey City dance company’s 40th anniversary gala.

But she will not be stripping.

“It’s a little late for that, I’m afraid,” Beldini, 82, said on Friday.

“I’m going to wear a lovely gown and a feather boa. I’m sure it’s going to be interesting.”

Company artistic director Diane Dragone said male dancers would escort Beldini on stage.

“She’ll kind of strut her stuff. She was hot stuff in the ’50s,” Dragone said.

Still recovering from a recent knee replacement surgery, Beldini was known in the 1950s as “the gem of the exotics.”

One of her last performances as Hope Diamond was in New York’s suburbs in 1970s, when she was described by the Long Island Press as “one of the premiere ecdysiasts,” or striptease performers.

Beldini, who also was treasurer of Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy’s re-election campaign in 2009, was convicted in February 2010 of accepting illegal campaign contributions in exchange for helping a corrupt developer win city approvals. She was sentenced to three years in prison and was released in 2014.

(Reporting by Barbara Goldberg; Editing by Scott Malone and Cynthia Osterman)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Carmen Cavallaro On Piano Jazz

The tender style of Carmen Cavallaro (1913 – 1989), known as the “Poet of the Piano,” created an ideal atmosphere for romantics worldwide. An outstanding pianist and a versatile performer, Cavallaro played everything from beguiling ballads to swinging jazz numbers and vibrant interpretations of Latin American melodies. He was Marian McPartland‘s guest shortly before he passed away in 1989. On this episode of Piano Jazz, Cavallaro solos on his own arrangement of a Cole Porter medley and joins McPartland for a piece entitled “Lover, Love Me Tonight.”

Originally broadcast in the spring of 1989.

Set List

  • “I Get A Kick Out Of You” (Porter)
  • “I’ve Got You Under My Skin” (Porter)
  • “Begin The Beguine” (Porter)
  • “Puttin’ On The Ritz” (Berlin)
  • “Lover, Love Me Tonight” (Rodgers, Hart)
  • “Poinciana” (Berner, Simon)
  • “I’ve Got A Crush On You” (Gershwin, Gershwin)
  • “Serenata” (Anderson)
  • “Delores My Own” (Cavallaro, Lamar)
  • “Gone With The Wind” (Boland, Bowman)
  • “Lover Come Back To Me” (Hammerstein, Romberg)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Pollsters Find 'At Best Mixed Evidence' Comey Letter Swayed Election

Democratic presidential nominee former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during a campaign rally at North Carolina State University on November 8, 2016.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

FBI Director James Comey said this week that he is “mildly nauseous” at the idea that the FBI may have swayed the presidential election results. A new report may ease that nausea, if only a little.

“We would conclude there is at best mixed evidence to suggest that the FBI announcement tipped the scales of the race,” wrote a panel of polling experts in a report released Thursday, about the FBI’s Oct. 28 announcement that it was investigating new information regarding Hillary Clinton’s emails.

The new report, from the American Association for Public Opinion Research, goes far beyond the Comey letter, however. More than a dozen pollsters and public opinion experts worked for months to determine what might have led polls to overestimate Clinton’s support. They find that state-level polls (but not national-level ones) were particularly far off from the final election results, leading many forecasters to overestimate Clinton’s chances of winning.

In response, the experts call for improvements in state-level polling, to ensure that the polling profession doesn’t suffer another “black eye” in coming years.

Here’s a summary of which polls were off and the reasons for the polling miss, according to the researchers — as well as factors that, as it turned out, didn’t seem to affect things much.

State polls were “historically bad”

By far, more Americans believed Clinton would win than Donald Trump — ahead of the election half of Americans thought she would, per one Economist/YouGov poll, compared to only 27 percent who believed it would be Trump. Forecasting models doubtless aided in that for at least some voters — predictions from some of the most popular models (FiveThirtyEight and the New York Times’ Upshot, for example) ranged from giving Clinton a 71 to 99 percent chance of winning.

So when she lost, everyone (including NPR) tried to answer the question: Why did polls — and, therefore, forecasting models — so often point to a Clinton win?

First off, only some polls were off, and it wasn’t the national polls. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2.1 percentage points, and polls had her winning the popular vote by an average of 3 points. That’s not much of a gap at all, compared to past presidential polling.

But state polls were off by an average of 5 points, the largest average since 2000. This is where the researchers drilled down into the whys of what went wrong.

Swing state late-deciders ended up going significantly pro-Trump

Part of the discrepancy between votes and polls was that voters did change their minds late — but it wasn’t necessarily because of Comey. The decline in Clinton’s support, the report finds, may have begun as early as Oct. 22, whereas Comey’s announcement came on Oct. 28. That doesn’t disprove that Comey’s letter changed things, but it does suggest other factors were depressing Clinton’s support at around the same time.

“The question is whether the letter made the decline more severe or somehow prevented her support from rebounding,” said Courtney Kennedy, director of survey research at the Pew Research Center and a co-author of the report, at a Thursday event. “I think that’s an important question, but it’s not knowable with the data available to us.”

Altogether, around 13 percent of voters nationally made up their minds in the final week, according to Pew data the researchers reviewed. That’s in line with past elections. However, in the swing states of Wisconsin, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania, those late-deciding voters were far more likely to vote for Trump than Clinton.

Nationwide, 45 percent of the late-deciding voters ended up voting for Trump, compared to 42 percent for Clinton. But in Michigan, for example, it was 50 percent for Trump and 39 percent for Clinton — and that was the smallest margin of these four states. In Wisconsin, meanwhile, it was 59 percent Trump, 30 percent Clinton.

“If we look back about the campaign events at that time, it was in those states — Wisconsin, Michigan — where you had the campaigns shifting their strategy at the very end of the campaign,” Kennedy said.

Critics lambasted Clinton about her swing state strategy, saying that she did not invest enough time or manpower in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, particularly in the final days of campaigning.

Education was another area that seemed to throw pollsters off. Voting patterns by education ended up being far different from what they had been in 2012.

In particular, the authors point out, the data show a U-shape in 2012 — people with high school diplomas only and post-grad degrees tended to vote more Democratic that year, while people in the middle (with college degrees and some college) were less Democratic. In 2016, it was more linear: the lowest-educated people were relatively likely to vote for Trump.

But among higher-educated groups, people were more likely to vote for Clinton, with post-graduates by far the most likely to vote for her.

The problem is that pollsters didn’t account for that, Kennedy said. Survey researchers do know that higher-educated people are more likely to participate in surveys. However, not all surveys factor that in.

“In 2016, that mattered,” she said. “Some elections you might get by without adjusting on education but in 2016, you had to adjust on education.”

One final factor that could have thrown polls off is turnout. Turnout patterns clearly boosted Trump. The counties where Obama performed worst in 2012 had higher turnout increases, while the counties that voted most for him had lower turnout increases, as the report points out.

The question is whether that different kind of turnout pattern threw off how pollsters adjusted their results. That seems plausible, said one researcher.

“To the extent that pollsters relied on 2012 as a model for the electorate either demographically or otherwise, there’s the potential that that introduced error,” said Mark Blumenthal, head of election polling for SurveyMonkey and one of the report’s authors, at Thursday’s event. “For that reason, our conclusion is that turnout probably was one of the two or three things that introduced error into this process; it’s just very difficult for us to to quantify it. It’s kind of an incomplete. It’s a story that’s not completely told.”

What probably didn’t affect the polls (much)

“Shy Trump voters” came up a lot in the run-up to the election, referring to the worry that Trump voters were reluctant to tell a live pollster that they supported him.

That doesn’t appear to be true.

“The committee tested that hypothesis in five different ways,” said Kennedy. “And each test yielded either no evidence whatsoever to support that hypothesis or weak evidence.”

If there were this “shy Trump voter” effect, the authors wrote, there should be some sort of evidence that robopolls (that is, automated phone polls) and Internet polls consistently showed Trump doing better than the phone polls, for example. That didn’t happen. Robopolls did tend to show Trump with better support than in live-phone polls, but Internet-only polls tended to show him doing worse.

One other issue that didn’t seem to matter much: “non-response bias.” This is the idea that certain groups will respond to polls more often than others, thus biasing the results. There’s a reason why survey researchers worry about this: people participate in phone polls far less often than they did in the past.

As explained above, some groups (like less educated Americans) often participate in polls less than others. But when the researchers broke this down by geography, they did not find that pro-Trump areas were any less likely to be represented, on average, than pro-Clinton areas. Furthermore, they didn’t find that the relatively-correct national polls were right just because Clinton- and Trump-favoring polls nationwide canceled each other out.

What now?

Though many 2016 polls were indeed off, the authors hope it won’t sour Americans on polling altogether: “The difficulties for election polls in 2016 are not an indictment on all of survey research or even all of polling.”

They also voiced some anger about the fact that a few bad polls can make all pollsters look bad.

“It is a persistent frustration within polling and the larger survey research community that the profession is judged based on how these often under-budgeted state polls perform relative to the election outcome,” they wrote.

For that reason, they propose a greater investment in state-level polling: “well-resourced survey organizations might have enough common interest in financing some high quality state-level polls so as to reduce the likelihood of another black eye for the profession.”

And one more thing: the researchers wag a collective finger at election forecasters, saying that “they helped crystalize the belief that Clinton was a shoo-in for president, with unknown consequences for turnout.”

What to do about that is unclear — even some of the people producing those forecasts advised caution. The pollsters even point to a quote from FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver in this regard.

“It’s irresponsible to blame the polls for the over-confidence in Clinton’s chances,” he said. “They showed a competitive, uncertain race.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Songs We Love: Lila Downs, 'Peligrosa'

Lila Downs’ upcoming album, Salón,grimas y Deseo, comes out May 26.

Marcela Taboada/Courtesy of the artist

hide caption

toggle caption

Marcela Taboada/Courtesy of the artist

Bring on the tequila for this one.

And imagine the likes of Chavela Vargas and Janis Joplin serenading the women we call las adelitas — the female Mexican revolutionaries — around your table. That’s the kind of badassery Lila Downs evokes with “Peligrosa, the lead track to her new album Salón, Lágrimas y Deseo.

Few alternative artists have the dynamic power and range of this bilingual warrior-woman, who has recorded nine albums, earning a Grammy and four Latin Grammys along the way. Salón, Lágrimas y Deseo follows in her artistically outspoken footsteps as an affirmation of feminine power.

YouTube

Peligrosa means “dangerous,” in the feminine form, and this track is where the intensity of a dramatic ranchera (the kind of sentimental rural song associated with mariachi) meets the cry of soulful blues. It’s where an independent rebel heart screams out in angst and desire for what it unapologetically wants: “Dicen que yo soy peligrosa, que yo soy dolorosa, porque quiero vivir así. … Te digo que sí soy peligrosa, sí soy desdeñosa porque te quiero para mí. … quiero lo bueno para mí.” (“They say I’m dangerous, that I’m painful, because I want to live this way. … Let me tell you, yes, I’m dangerous, I’m scornful, because I want you for me. … I want what’s good for me!”)

This is where Downs, the phoenix, ramps up her deep, husky voice and powerhouse vibrato to rise up from the ashes: “No sé lo que siento contigo, pero todo lo quiero contigo, y todo lo puedo. No sé qué será sin eso que tienes tú que parece amor.(“I don’t know what I feel with you, but I want all with you and I can do all. I don’t know what will be, without what you have that seems like love.”)

After having begun with a mariachi’s flair of trumpets and strings against blues chords, the song switches over to bluesy verses with mariachi accents. An interlude of beautiful violins leads to a dramatic build-up that ends in classic Downs fashion, transforming from a high pitched wail to a whisper in one stirring breath.

No doubt Vargas, Joplin and las adelitas would be raising their shot glasses and cheering “¡Otra, otra!” for more.


Salón, Lágrimas y Deseo comes out May 26.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Top Stories: April Jobs Report; Venezuela Protests Continue

Good morning, here are our early stories:

— April Jobs Report: 211,000 Jobs Added, Unemployment At 4.4 Percent.

— India’s Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentences Over 2012 Gang Rape.

— Gustavo Dudamel Addresses Venezuela’s Leaders: ‘Enough Is Enough’.

— Chinese-Made Passenger Jet Takes Off For Its First Test Flight.

And here are more early headlines:

Central U.S. Still Soaked By Heavy Flooding. (AP)

Uber Facing Inquiry Over Software To Fool Regulators. (New York Times)

Many French Voters May Abstain In Presidential Election. (Financial Times)

Ga. Gov. Signs Law Allowing Concealed Guns On College Campuses. (AJC)

Group Reports Food Insecurity Leads To Migration. (World Food Program)

Parts Of Ethiopia Face Severe Drought. (Washington Post)

Crowds Of Climbers Waiting To Scale Everest. (Daily Mail)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)