Recent comments in /f/todayilearned

jonhasglasses t1_j6tq9he wrote

Reply to comment by JamminOnTheOne in TIL The Super Bowl can generate anywhere from $230 million to $475 million in economic impact for host cities. by BrainInYourButt

That’s a fair point but I’d argue that the short term benefits are outweighed by the long term negative externalities of a stadium. First of all it seems that the short term benefit of the Super Bowl is only about a quarter of what the NFL says it is. https://smallbusiness.chron.com/super-bowls-affect-businesses-62826.html. Most of the reports I’ve seen about the impact of a Super Bowl count public sector jobs (police, emts, public transportation workers, city maintenance worker etc.) as part of the job growth, which the budget for that comes from the public budget. And you would think that the extra tax revenue from the event would balance that public investment out, but I find that dubious as the NFL and the people who own teams/build stadiums have some of the highest tax subsidies of any industry. That’s all assuming a Super Bowl comes to your city. I find reports that say the Super Bowl is a benefit to local economies are being willful ignorant of the long term impact of stadiums and sports teams.

3

JamminOnTheOne t1_j6tlo1i wrote

Reply to comment by jonhasglasses in TIL The Super Bowl can generate anywhere from $230 million to $475 million in economic impact for host cities. by BrainInYourButt

That article is about the economic impact of building a new stadium, which is indeed dubious, as most of the spending for and around stadium events would occur anyway.

But big events like the Super Bowl do bring in significant economic activity, as the spending is most likely by out-of-towners and large corporations, that would not be spent in that city without the SB. It’s not as significant as the industry likes to tout, but studies have shown that the effect is real.

8

casualsax t1_j6t53k9 wrote

Reply to comment by doctor-rumack in TIL the Wayne Gretzky trade from Edmonton to the LA Kings yielded a "Trade Tree" that lasted 34 years (i.e. the players and draft picks Gretzky was traded for in 1988 spawned their own trades and draft picks over the years, with the final player leaving the NHL before this current season.) by doctor-rumack

Not nearly as long yet but pretty funny: MLS has international roster spots to limit the number of foreign players on teams to foster local talent. These spots can be traded, typically for the length of a season.

In 2005 Real Salt Lake traded a spot permanently to the Colorado Rapids for Adolfo Gregorio, who made a whopping six appearances for them. He was released the following season, never to play professionally again.

15

doctor-rumack OP t1_j6szbog wrote

Reply to comment by bolanrox in TIL the Wayne Gretzky trade from Edmonton to the LA Kings yielded a "Trade Tree" that lasted 34 years (i.e. the players and draft picks Gretzky was traded for in 1988 spawned their own trades and draft picks over the years, with the final player leaving the NHL before this current season.) by doctor-rumack

It’s a long time, but I can’t verify if it’s the longest in North American pro sports. It’s also interesting because it’s Gretzky, so yes. He’s considered to be the greatest player in the history of his sport, and he was traded in his prime. It’s an example of the impact he had on the NHL that trading a single player has a cause/effect lasting that long.

8

Khontis t1_j6syij2 wrote

Reply to comment by bolanrox in TIL the Wayne Gretzky trade from Edmonton to the LA Kings yielded a "Trade Tree" that lasted 34 years (i.e. the players and draft picks Gretzky was traded for in 1988 spawned their own trades and draft picks over the years, with the final player leaving the NHL before this current season.) by doctor-rumack

That is crazy long.

Most hockey trade trees go at most a decade or so. Gretzky has the current longest trade tree in history.

https://youtu.be/lvuqTgdiM_E

This is one of many in depth trade trees to help put it into perspective of how insanely long it is

22

seminote t1_j6susf7 wrote

Reply to comment by WhiteyVanReeks in TIL DNA transfer does not only occur "vertically", that is, from parent to progeny. There is also a form of DNA transfer known as horizontal or intracellular DNA transfer, which consists in a piece of DNA being transferred from the genome of one cell to that of another—including between species. by DioriteLover

It’s junk. Nonsense codons. They don’t code for anything and are just artifacts of specific types of viruses that integrate into our genome. They actually are a great history book that scientists use to mark time points in human evolution.

2

WhiteyVanReeks t1_j6rub13 wrote

Reply to comment by seminote in TIL DNA transfer does not only occur "vertically", that is, from parent to progeny. There is also a form of DNA transfer known as horizontal or intracellular DNA transfer, which consists in a piece of DNA being transferred from the genome of one cell to that of another—including between species. by DioriteLover

Is it actually “junk” or possibly something we can’t detect it’s use due to lack of technology?

2