NBA and Los Angeles Clippers need to come up with a more fairminded penalty.

I think the Los Angeles Clippers should contest the loss of 5, first round draft picks by the NBA, in Court. The loss of 5, first round draft picks contrives two opposing punishment solutions, together. On the one hand, the removal of 5 first round draft picks mitigates the 30 million dollar penalty, since 5 less first round draft picks lowers the Clippers financial obligation towards new draft picks, making the financial penalty a redundantly silly financial penalty.

On the the other hand, forcefully removing 5, first round draft picks weakens the team competitively for an extended period of time, which goes against the entire spirit of Professional Sportsmanship, and Clippers fans.

THE PENALTY HAS TO BE REWORKED.

The Clippers could be penalized a total of 100 DRAFT PICK POSITIONS, in which the Clippers first round draft pick position would be demoted down to the 30th position from wherever the position would have been without the penalty, until 100 total draft pick position demotions have been consumed within a 4 to 10 year range, with each year's first round draft pick position demotion number depending on their yearly original draft pick position based on wins and losses, then subtract the number of draft pick positions until the 30th draft pick position is reached. Once 100 draft pick demotions have been reached, the draft pick penalty, along with the 30 million dollar penalty which would remain, would become resolved.

My idea is SUPERIOR in every way to what the NBA meted out. Honestly, I am a genius at simple math solutions, have been my whole life, but when everyone pushes and prods neuro divergent simple math genius types to take all the higher end math classes which they cannot process, Simple Math Divergent Geniuses are overlooked and extremely undervalued.

Has LinkedIn ever listed a job position for a Simple Math Divergent Genius? Of course not. How I came up with this brilliant, Los Angeles Clippers versus the NBA compromise solution is based on my ability to connect dots based on dozens of prior concepts, solutions, innovations, and, my empathy skills.

Consumer Credit Card Home Equity Equivalency Multiplier should exist, but does not.

My Simple Math Detective idea for next year, 2025, is the creation of a true multiplier of Consumer Credit Card Debt so it can be equivalently compared to Consumer Home Equity debt. 

What if one day the correct Consumer Credit Card debt multiplier reveals there is more consumer debt, than consumer home equity? 

I personally view more consumer credit card debt than consumer home equity as a major, possibly unfixable economic disaster, yet no one is keeping score as Consumer Credit Card debt keeps rising. 

I have estimated a Consumer Credit Card Debt multiplier of 12. So the 1.2 trillion dollars in Consumer Credit Card is the equivalent of 14.4 Trillion dollars in Home Equity.

As of September, 2024, according to CNBC, there is 32 trillion dollars in Consumer Home Equity. 

 

As long as a Consumer Credit Card Debt multiplier of 12X is accurate, then there is wiggle room between 14.4 Trillion dollars of actual Consumer Credit Card Debt versus 32 Billion of Consumer Home Equity.

But what if the correct multiplier is actually 16X? Suddenly the numbers merge closer, 19.2 trillion actual Consumer Credit Card debt versus 32 Trillion dollars of Home Equity Wealth.

In 2008, home values plummeted by an average of 33%. My hope for 2025 is real Economists assess a true comparative multiplier of Consumer Credit Card Debt to Home Equity, because one thing that is different from 2008, Credit Card Interest rates have increased by 50% or higher while total Consumer Credit Card Debt has also risen by 50%.

Dare I mention Lending Tree estimates there is 1.74 trillion in student loan debt for a total of 3 trillion dollars in Consumer Credit Card and Student Loan Debt. Suddenly the 12X multiplier eclipses the total Home Equity, 36 Trillion to 32 Trillion.

 

With the growing transition to a data economy, we may witness fewer, but better paying jobs, creating an even greater economic divide then has been witness since probably the Great Depression that started in the late 1920's. 

 

Are we inadvertently witnessing a 100 year Economic Cycle and are on the precipice of another great depression 100 years later?

Consumer Credit Card Home Equity Equivalency Multiplier should exist, but does not.

My Simple Math Detective idea for next year, 2025, is the creation of a true multiplier of Consumer Credit Card Debt so it can be compared to Consumer Home Equity Equivalently. 

What if one day the correct Consumer Credit Card debt multiplier reveals there is more consumer debt, than consumer home equity? 

I personally view more consumer credit card debt than consumer home equity as a major, possibly unfixable economic disaster, yet no one is keeping score as Consumer Credit Card debt keeps rising. 

I have estimated a Consumer Credit Card Debt multiplier of 12. So the 1.2 trillion dollars in Consumer Credit Card is the equivalent of 14.4 Trillion dollars in Home Equity.

As of September, 2024, according to CNBC, there is 32 trillion dollars in Consumer Home Equity. 

 

As long as a Consumer Credit Card Debt multiplier of 12X is accurate, then there is wiggle room between 14.4 Trillion dollars of actual Consumer Credit Card Debt versus 32 Billion of Consumer Home Equity.

But what if the correct multiplier is actually 16X? Suddenly the numbers merge closer, 19.2 trillion actual Consumer Credit Card debt versus 32 Trillion dollars of Home Equity Wealth.

In 2008, home values plummeted by an average of 33%. My hope for 2025 is real Economists assess a true comparative multiplier of Consumer Credit Card Debt to Home Equity, because one thing that is different from 2008, Credit Card Interest rates have increased by 50% or higher while total Consumer Credit Card Debt has also risen by 50%.

Dare I mention Lending Tree estimates there is 1.74 trillion in student loan debt for a total of 3 trillion dollars in Consumer Credit Card and Student Loan Debt. Suddenly the 12X multiplier eclipses the total Home Equity, 36 Trillion to 32 Trillion.

 

With the growing transition to a data economy, we may witness fewer, but better paying jobs, creating an even greater economic divide then has been witness since probably the Great Depression that started in the late 1920's. 

 

Are we inadvertently witnessing a 100 year Economic Cycle and are on the precipice of another great depression 100 years later?

Simple Math proves inflation is not cooling as of April 13, 2023. Simple Math proves the FED is stealing wealth from American Citizens with their high interest rates.

N.Y. Times April 13, 2023 analysis regarding the state of inflation.

This Times chart reveals that gasoline prices have dropped 17%. 

Remove Gasoline from the contributing list of inflation factors and Inflation increases from 5% to 5.5%.

Another Times Chart reveals...

that the simultaneous shutting down of the economy because of COVID restrictions followed by Biden whispering into the camera, "I got you 1.9 trillion" apparently created such an alarm from the FED they acted soon after.

But, as the Times Article states, "There is a risk that the FED does too little and inflation persists...or, there is the risk the FED goes too far and does unnecessary damage to the economy, aka, THE PEOPLE.

How does ratcheting up credit card interest rates help those who already have debt, fight inflation? How does forcing Americans to buy less while their overall debt increases, fight inflation? Since when is inflation fought by increasing debt among Americans?

The FED needs to reevaluate how their actions are adversely affecting Americans with credit card debt and Seniors who were planning on using a Reverse Mortgage to supplement their monthly income.

If Credit Card Companies raise their interest rates to discourage too much borrowing, then Credit Card companies MUST ALSO reduce credit card interest rates on existing credit card debt so mutually beneficial agendas are achieved. Existing consumer credit card debt requires a significant interest rate reductions as future purchases are reduced by increasing interest rate charges on new purchases.

Many Americans with Credit Card Debt are being punished by an incomplete Credit Card policy. Seniors who were hoping to use a Reverse Mortgage to get by, in essence rewarding themselves for being responsible and building up their home equity, are now discovering their low interest mortgage (courtesy of Donald Trump era policies) MUST BE PAID OFF and REPLACED with a higher interest rate Reverse Mortgage. Reverse Mortgage Loan expenses into the thousands that have compounded  interest assigned to them, plus mortgage insurance, result in a huge reduction in Reverse Mortgage benefits.

Reverse Mortgage benefits have been severely compromised because the FED has raised interest rates several percentage points. Retirees could easily be losing an extra thousand dollars a month in compounding interest rate charges, or, find they can only tap half the amount they could have tapped just a scant year ago!

Banks have been blindsided by the FED's rapid increase in interest rates. Banks that less than a year go were paying 1% percent interest or less on savings accounts, are now offering 4% or higher. 

Government based entitlements are drying up as COVID restrictions are ending and the annual U.S. military budget spikes.

The American people are being spurned and deceived by the FED's interest rate hikes that lack the accompanying humanity that needs to be a part of any "corrective" economic action the FED has already initiated.

How YouTube spent 30 billion dollars and couldn't even give scraps to their most loyal base.

 Youtube's model for paying out to their video creation base is no different than the Occupy Movement's complaint about the 1% owning 99% of everything.

Youtube paid out 30 bllion dollars over the past 3 years. How much of that 30 trillion trickled down to their most loyal base? Probably zero. 

Even video creation made by the people for the people become victimized by the same old tried and true account gimmicks, reward the most watched by taking viewing opportunities from the lowly video maker and heaping it on the most watched videos. Algorithms are not intuitive enough to not create self-fulfilling prophecies because they are created by people who know numbers better than sentiment.

There are things Youtube could do to instantly make things fairer, but I won't give them out for free, not when Youtube has 30 billion to throw at the feet of the 1% while providing zero for the rest. Sure, housing and storing the videos and giving people free accounts is a gift but it becomes a gift of the maji if the videos never get seen.

Juan Soto Declines 440 million dollar contract extension offer for 15 years, a Simple Math solution exists.

Washington Nationals offered Juan Soto 440 million dollars for 15 years, the offer was rejected so Washington is going to trade Juan Soto for a slew of quality prospects, a slew being 5 or 6 quality prospects.

 MLB discusses the Juan Soto situation here.

A few months ago I explained how to resolve the Jose Ramirez Contract talks with the Cleveland Guardians. My idea was used almost identically, ironically my idea should have been used identically since it would have back ended Jose Ramirez's final two years at a lower amount so the front of the contract could be across the board front loaded while while Jose is in his prime. 

In a second article after the contract extension was announced, I explained where the final agreement fell slightly short of what it could and should have been. Jose Ramirez's graciousness allowed the deal to go through without the final little touch I would have insisted upon. I still hope the Dolan's realize the error of their ways and push the final two arbitration years to the back of the contract as I had suggested.

As for the Juan Sotoa contract situation, Simple Math Detective has a simple question, how many years is Washington willing to offer 450 million? (the 440 was an obvious ploy to agree to level it off at 450 in exchange for a deal.)

Why does the Washington offer have to be for 15 years? What if the Nationals offer 450 million for 12 years? Suddenly that is 36.29 million per year instead of 30 million.

Soto is 2.4 years away from free agency, so being confined to the arbitration rules until then might mean Soto gets significantly less than the Nationals per year offer over these next 30 arbitration months. By signing now, Soto may gain an additional 20 million without having to push for any more than the 450 million. This would work out to 37.9 million per year if the Nationals agree to start Soto's new deal immediately.

Ironically, if Soto were to sign a 12.4 year deal now, he would only be around 35 years old when his deal expires, meaning he still could be in the market for another 3 year deal and assuming the earth and its people hold it together, that deal could be for 100 million.

The end result is 570 million dollars through age 38 whether Soto re-signs with the Nationals for 3 additional years or goes somewhere else. A second contract for 100 million, 450 million for the original contract, plus the 20 million additional million dollars by signing a new contract now rather than in 2. 4 years puts Soto at 570 million total, also known as 38 million a year for the next 15 years, well above the 29.5 million the Nationals have offered. 

It's all about Simple Math and this strategy could produce the result both sides want.

3 hours 50 minutes before LA Mayor Polls close, are the LA Times polling prediction results more mysterious than anyone realizes?

A Sunday, June 5, 2022 LA Times Mayoral Poll claims Karen Bass at 38%, Rick Caruso at 32%, Kevin De Leon at 6% and 15% undecided, There are nine total candidates for LA Mayor so the other six candidates apparently will share the remaining 9% of the vote.

If the Undecided decide not to vote, then suddenly the polling numbers have to be adjusted. The new result could be Bass 46%, Caruso 39%, Kevin Deleon 7%, rest of the field 8%.

Even Deleon could be a wildcard in this scenario in terms of what percentage he gets. It could be he gets more of the undecided vote who do not want either main candidate and ends up at 9%

That could make the final result Bass 46%, Caruso 39%, Deleon 9%, rest of the field 6%.

If it turns out the LA Times poll was inaccurate and Caruso actually had the lead, let's say it would have been Caruso 40%, Bass 37%, Deleon 8%, Undecided 15%, what happens if the Undecided don't vote?

Caruso might have 44%, Bass 40%, DeLeon 10%, rest of the field 6%.

In all scenarios it appears that Mr. DeLeon will be the reason there probably will be a run-off in October. However, if the Undecided truly do not vote, both major candidates do have an outside shot of reaching the 50% plus one majority that would mean no run off election this fall.

The LA Mayor Polls could be precariously wrong because polls do not extrapolate the total results of those who have no chance to win but will still make a dent with their numbers, along with the undecided voters.

I think we have a 50/50 chance that the winning candidate may eclipse 50%, something no one is predicting.  

Not sure how important Karen Bass is to the Democrat National Party, but it sure is suspicious to me for so many Federal Employees to have descended on LA literally days before the Primary Election for the Summit of the Americas that will run all week that is being hosted by both Kamala Harris and Joe Biden.

Who interferes with a local election literally on Election Day and the day before? Whose idea was that?

Originally I would have been willing to say that maybe Mr. Caruso gets over the 50% in the primaries, but with the infiltration of so many government based security personnel for Summit of the Americas.  I am starting to think maybe Karen Bass is going to reach 50% to the surprise of everyone. 

(Update: June 07 2022, 5:39:pm) Maybe Venezuela and Cuba were not invited knowing Mexico would not show up and thus any nefarious activity would be less likely to be noticed by other countries. Just throwing out a conspiracy theory based on the timing and circumstance of the Summit of the Americas. (End of June 07, 2022, 5:39pm update).

Front Loading a Young MLB Superstar's contract early on may be the key to keeping them beyond six years.

Many MLB teams are gleeful when one of their young prospects practically becomes an instant star. The young baseball player is under "team control" for the first six years of their career and the return on investment during those first three years can be a remarkable value to many a team.

However, something definitely went "wrong" perhaps a decade or more ago when arbitration started amping up arbitration eligible players by surprising amounts. Teams that thought they had at least 5 years of affordable control found the fifth year could suddenly cost them 17 million. A four year player could command 10 million.

Even more frightening, players that had poor seasons or missed most of the season due to injury STILL got a raise.

It was as if 6 year control was really 3 year control and then hope that the fourth year was not too high of a jump so that maybe they could also keep the player for the fifth year. In some instances, it has become 4 years and goodbye, we can't afford you.

However, sometimes creative math can rebalance the playing field. For every player who is truly going to have a prolific career there are several others who may either peak early, or, turn into solid players with untapped upside that may not reveal itself until their 7th or 8th season.

If a team is certain a player is going to be a can't miss player then perhaps a front loading contract pricing strategy needs to be considered. If MLB arbitration players can now reach 22 million to 25 million by year six, then maybe the lure of front loaded contracts may be the next best move for an MLB team that wants to try and squeeze one or two more years from their young stars before they lose them to free agency.

Let's take a look at the Cleveland Indians Salary obligations for Francisco Lindor. The jump from season three to season four is remarkable. There is literally a 1,500% increase in Salary.

However, it should also be noted the remarkable return Mr. Lindor contributed over his first four seasons. The Indians tried to lock up Mr. Lindor after his second season. Lindor's first season was a mid season call up so it was his second season that counted towards his six years. The rumor I heard was the Indians offered around 105 million for probably 7 more seasons for a total of 8 seasons plus the 2/3's of a season that did not count towards his six year commitment.

Unfortunately for the Cleveland Indians, between the signing bonus money Mr. Lindor received, PLUS the New Balance Contract Mr. Lindor already had signed, Mr. Lindor felt comfortable biding his time until his six years were up.

In an ironic twist early on, Lindor's call up was delayed so the Indians could get an extra 2/3's of a season that would not count towards his six years. The irony was that was the year the Indians barely missed the playoffs and maybe if Lindor had been called up early enough, maybe he is a difference maker.  Although, it can also be argued that Jose Ramirez, who was called up first in that same year, got invaluable time at shortstop that help with his development.

Either way, how could the Indians have structured their offer to lure Mr. Lindor into staying in Cleveland for a couple more years?

Assuming the Indians did offer Mr. Lindor 105 million for a 7 year extension after his second year in Cleveland (but only his first towards his Aribtration 6), they probably offered something like 1 million, 4 million, 10 million, 15 million, 20 million, 25 million, 30 million.

I am totally ball parking the numbers but they probably are close enough to the offer that was made.

This is what I would have offered Mr. Lindor, a front loaded conract.... 15 million, 15 million 15 million, 15 million, 15 million, 15 million, 15 million, Starting after the first year of his arbitration which would be year two in the league since his first 2/3's year did not count towards Arbitration.

In the front loaded version after 4 years Mr. Lindor gets 60 million, in the original offer, after four years Mr. Lindor gets 30 million.  

The front loaded contract gives Mr. Lindor 15 extra million after year one, a total of 25 million after year 2, and a total of 30 million more after year three, a serious chunk of front loaded money to reinvest. While more conventional contracts are back heavy, the front loaded contract gives Mr. Lindor more opportunities to immediately start getting a bigger return on his contract which can also be a hedge in the event there is any kind of performance or injury clause in the contract. 

Even if there is no injury or performance clause, the odds are the front loaded contract might be worth signing since it is overall a better deal and does not put off paying Mr. Lindor in the future what he can earn today.

Now lets compare the front loaded deal to what Mr. Lindor has actually received. 

As it turns out, either of the Indians offers may turn out to be better because of the impact that the Coronavirus has had. But based on the published numbers which do not show any Coronavirus impact, Mr. Lindor will receive 52 million through his sixth season. Assuming his free agency lands him a 30 million a year contract, add two years in at 60 million for a total of 112 million for 8 years. For a paltry 7 million "extra dollars",  Mr. Lindor will have to wait until his 9th year in the league to come out ahead when he could have come out ahead 7 years earlier! And, if Mr. Lindor had made any kind of wise investments with a front loaded contract, the front loaded contract probably nets him anywhere from 5 million to 25 million extra since it was all guaranteed up front early on.

Mr. Lindor really has yet to see a return on his decision to wait it out. Lindor never delivered a championship season in Cleveland and his leaving does tarnish his overall "love of the game" reputation just a bit since in Cleveland not only was he highly regarded, but his health was valued and he was never rushed or forced to play when injured.

Mr. Lindor tries to take the position that he has never said he could lead or carry a team on his shoulders to a championship, and yet, he wants to be paid like someone who can.

Possibly the cruelest irony is Francisco Lindor is from Puerto Rico and the Cleveland Indians are the Puerto Rico of MLB, too poor to buy a championship, but too proud and strong enough to run together an impressive 7 years of .500 or better baseball and one of the best winning percentages during that seven year in all of baseball. 

I doubt the Indians made it clear to Lindor that winning a championship in Cleveland would be almost identical to Puerto Rico winning the World Series and that this could happen if Mr. Lindor did not tie his value to getting the biggest contract possible. 

It appears Mr. Lindor wants to be on a team that can afford to pay their top 2 or 3 players 30 million a year. Yet that is a song and dance that has torpedo'd other teams with 2 or more future Hall of Fame players such as the Detroit Tigers and the California Angels.

It is very rarified air to find teams that can pay 2 players 30 million or more each, per season and still win a championship. It may be even thinner air to find a team that can pay 2 players 30 million a year and also be a perennial playoff and championship caliber team. the reason being any team with two great players being paid 30 million a year or more requires at least 3 additional players who are really good. So good that when they see that two teammates are making 30 million or more, they want at least 20 million a year. Suddenly a team's. Suddenly the team's top five players put the payroll at 120 million.  Suddenly, certain positions have to used to offset the 120 million already spent on only 5 players and the team becomes mired at around .500 or barely over.

The Indians now face a similar situation with their star pitcher, Shane Bieber. It is my personal opinion that Mr Beiber's stuff did not look as good as the Yankees Gerrit Cole during the 2020 playoffs. And yet, during the regular season Beiber looked fantastic. 

Cole appears to throw about 3 to 4 miles an hour faster on his fastball and his pitches can have an unhittable rise to them. Beiber seems better at pin point accuracy but it seems in terms of raw pitching, Cole has strike out pitches and Beiber has fake out pitches. During the regular season fake out pitches work well because a pitcher is constantly facing new opponents and he can feast on the more average teams. However, a disciplined playoff team may not bite at Beiber's fake out pitches and suddenly he may only be a 5 or 6 inning pitcher.

Do the Indians risk a front loaded contract on Beiber or has he already maxed out and may ultimately be the second best pitcher on the team, rather than the best? Or is Bieber's work ethic and overall mental make-up and his overall demeanor a keeper and the Indians should make an effort to keep him here long term?

And if the Indians do make a long term offer, do they front load it, or not?

My Youtube Videos can be found here.

Here is a link to all of my Youtube Videos.

Sixty Minutes uses phrase "Simple Math" in it's Sunday, May 26, 2019 episode during their Horse Adoption Segment.

Nice to see Sixty Minutes acknowledge and use the concept of "Simple Math" to describe how the U.S. Government was able to save the lives of Wild Horses.

Perhaps due to the Memorial Holiday weekend I have been unable to find a link to the story. When I find it I will add it.

2019 NBA Draft Lottery could produce some Disappointed Bottom 3 or 4 team Draft Position Results.

Edit update, (Monday, May 27, 2019) when I wrote this article I somehow had incorrectly concluded that the three worst records could not pick lower than five, so my prediction was of course much too generous as a result. end of update.

The NBA continues to tweak with the NBA Draft Lottery. In an effort to not reward teams that perennially lose and end up with really great draft pick positioning as a direct result, the NBA once again has changed the mathematical probabilities regarding how the bottom four teams will fare in terms of lottery positioning for the 2019 NBA draft.

The teams with the four worst records will have a cumulative chance of 56% of getting the first pick in the 2019 NBA Draft. Stated another way, the top three teams with the worst NBA records only have about a 44% chance of getting the first pick in the 2019 NBA Draft.

If the first pick in the Draft does not go to one of the three worst won loss record teams in the league, we could see a 3,4,5, draft position for those three teams. Of course all variations are in play. We could see 2,4,5 for the three worst records. 

Simple Math Detective is relatively certain we won't see a 1,2,3 finish for the three teams with the worst record in the NBA. Once one of the three teams does place, it just means at least one of the remaining two of the top three teams with the worst record will probably fall an extra position. I doubt we will see a 2,3,4 finish for the top three teams with the worst records in the NBA.

The 2019 NBA draft will probably leave a lasting bad memory for at least one if not two of the three teams with the worst records in the league.

What we won't see, we won't see a 1,2 finish among the three teams with the worst record, and we certainly won't see a 1,2,3, finish. Since we probably won't see the number one pick going to any of the worst three, that leaves a 2,4, and 5 scenario for the three teams with the worst record. 

After the 2019 draft is done, there is a clever tweak the NBA could make so the 2020 draft probably better reflects the delicate balance of the worst teams getting the best picks and the slightly better than worst teams retaining a chance to move up in the Draft.

College Bribery Enrollment Scandal Misses the Simple Math Solution.

The entire College Bribery Scandal seems to be another adventure in pointless class envy that everyone will take way too seriously, and could send some parents to jail. Or the Feds will use their Checkbook Justice Mafia to fine rich people so they can fund the Treasury. None of what is going to happen will help the people who need it most, Middle and Lower Income class kids who want a chance to attend a prestigious University.

I don't care how much the College bribes were. What I don't understand is why couldn't the Ultra Wealthy Parents simply pay into a College Scholarship fund that would give less affluent but deserving students a free ride? 

If a Parent is willing to pay a 1/2 million dollar bribe to get  a Daughter or Son into a prestigious college, and then pay the tuition for their own son or daughter on top of that bribe, why not just create a special fund in which Affluent Parents donate a 1/2 million dollars so a certain number of other kids get a free ride to the college, and their own kid gets to attend as well as long as they pay for their tuition.

While law and order will bellow that bribery is against the law, why isn't lack of common fiduciary sense against the law? If there are people out there willing to make extraordinary payments to ensure their kids get into a college, then just let them make the payment directly to the college so less wealthy families can benefit. 

Imagine if a half a million dollar bribery check had been split into ten 50,000 dollar scholarships. Would anyone really care that in exchange for that tremendous donation, the Donor could then pay the regular tuition price to have their own child admitted to the College?

In the absence of this common sense approach, I am hoping a Judge will see through the entire Federal Scheme to shame people who should have first been given the opportunity to make a significant donation to the school so those less wealthy could attend in exchange for the privilege of then paying full tuition price for their own child's enrollment.

Charlie Sheen earned more money from ONE episode of ANGER MANAGEMENT than Jussie Smollett's Total Salary for his first three years on EMPIRE.

Jussie Smollette is the victim of Financial Abuse by Fox. Charlie Sheen was paid more for ONE episode of Anger Management (2 million dollars), then Jussie Smollett's total salary for his first three years on Empire, around 54 episodes.
Both shows were created for Fox.

Smollette started at 20,000 per episode but it is proving difficult to find a year by year Salary for Smollette. Newsweek did a story in October of 2016 about African American Actors being paid too little compared to Caucasian actors, even when the African American Actors are on a show that is getting better ratings than a Caucasian Actor's show.

In October of 2016 Newsweek was reporting that Smollette was still being paid 20,000 dollars an episode. Huffington Post reported Smollette was making 65,000 per episode for this past 2018-2019 season. The Problem is that a 20,000 dollar starting Salary meant any raise would look significant and generous based on percentages so it may have taken Smollette several years to finally get to the 65,000 per episode mark, which for a four year actor on the first or second highest rated show on Fox, and the show is an hour long, is still well below where the salary should be. 

If Smollette had been paid based on Empire's rating's popularity, his Salary for this past Season should have been at least 100,000 per episode instead of 65,000. But just as importantly, the initial low salary creates a negative cascading affect in which each year's raise still keeps Smollette below what he should have been being paid all along.

It may be safe to presume that Smollette was basically underpaid by about 20,000 to 30,000 per episode over the life of the show, presently 74 episodes.  That's around 1.5 to 2.3 million dollars of underpayment Smollette never got. 

Smollette was taken advantage of by the same Network that paid Charlie Sheen 2 million dollars per episode when Anger Management hit its 100th show. However, Sheen was still making 1.8 million prior to the 100th episode of Anger Management.

It appears that Sheen's behavior, which included Drugs, Drinking, Prostitutes and eventually acquiring HIV and possibly sharing his HIV with others did not deter Fox from paying Sheen 2 million per episode for Anger Management. Even if the HIV news was after the Series Anger Management had concluded its run, the other unruly behavior sure didn't seem to have any type of negative affect on Sheen's salary.

Were the Female co-stars on Anger Management underpaid? Sheen may have gotten his female co star Selma Blair fired when she questioned his work ethic. When will Fox be investigated for their Contracting Practices that could be the equivalent of Financial Abuse for Minorities and Female Actors?

Although Smollette was a co-star on Empire and Sheen was the Lead on both 2 and 1/2 Men and Anger Management, the disparity between what Sheen was making per episode to what Smollette was getting per episode over the first year or two was a remarkable 9,000% to 10,000% difference. By the end of year four the percentage difference might have been reduced to perhaps 3,000% to 4,000% difference.

It's not as if Smollette wasn't talented. Compare Smollett and Sheen's Singing abilities...This is Charlie Sheen directly below.

How Can Jussie Smollett compete with Charlie Sheen?

Simple Math Detective is concerned that it is in Hollywood's best interest to keep the pay disparity between what Smollette should have been making and what he was making a secret and instead go with the Narrative that Smollette may have behaved criminally. 

I get that what Smollette is alleged to have done can be construed as illegal, but it seems that years of being underpaid, aka financial abuse, took its toll, and I hope that part of the Smollette Story does not continue to be obfuscated by the Media.

Meanwhile, Charlie Sheen attempts to rise for the third time.

A Presidential Popularity Puzzle for you to Figure out.

There is one President in the Presidential Chart Below that is different from all the other Presidents, can you find it? Hint, It is not about how long they served as President.

You can find the original chart and story here.

The LAUSD Teacher's Strike Won't use their own Math Teachers to Calculate a Fair Agreement.

I believe in Simple Math. Simple Math can solve complex problems. The Teacher's Strike in Los Angeles is using one big number to justify the strike, a 2 billion dollar rainy day fund that apparently took several years to create. 

I found one stat that intrigued me. It appears that the LAUSD is stockpiling about 300 million dollars a year in a rainy day fund. The Rainy Day Fund is up to around 2 billion dollars. The Teacher's Union wants that 2 billion dollars busted open and apparently, used up within a relatively short amount of time to give both raises and a remarkable increase in teachers to accommodate smaller classes.

Using Simple Math, my suggestion would be that of the 300 million dollars being saved every year, 100 million has to be saved very year as a Rainy Day fund, 100 million per year should go towards the huge future pension obligations, and 100 million per year should goes towards teacher's raises and smaller classrooms.

Sadly, what should be a public discussion of numbers is being hidden behind closed doors. The Union is portraying itself as a victim even though apparently 40% of their annual budget goes towards pensions and healthcare. Democrat Politicians are giving their support behind the Strike. It all seems so false to me. 

There are just numbers, the rest is all theatrics. There are probably hundreds of Math Teachers in the Picket Line, none of them have been asked to go over the numbers. If the Teacher's Union can't use their own Math Teachers to help resolve the Strike, then what message are they sending to their own students and the world about the value of learning Math?

Simple Math could solve the Student Loan Debt Crisis in the United States.

Welcome to the world of Simple Math. There aren't that many out there that advocate solving problems with simple math because anyone who is respected or has a respectable job has to have a solid foundation in complicated math. 

One key to solving the Student Loan crisis is to understand why change is not happening. Change and resolution in the Student Loan crisis is not happening because of two relatively simple rules that control what politicians will and won't do.

Rule Number one is "The Promise to Pay". These four little words protect the money world from all kinds of tricksters and people who otherwise would not pay. Rule Number two is a bit more heartless but probably exists because "The Promise to Pay" exists.

Rule Number two is, "No Debt shall be modified unless a Default is Declared First". Please take a moment and let that sink in. "No Debt shall be modified unless a Default is Declared First". In case one wants to disagree and say, what about a home, people refi all the time. Sure, the equity in the home allows for interested parties to pay off the first debt, and then come up with a new debt plan. Whereas debt that has no equity backing it has no way to be paid off so the only way to come up with a new debt plan is to declare a default on the first debt.

However, The Simple Math Detective believes there are ways to peacefully coexist with the both the Promise to Pay and Restructuring a Debt without Declaring a Default, but it will require politicians writing new and passing new laws.

Simply put, Simple Math Detective believes that certain rules and guidelines could be incorporated into existing Loan laws that would help emancipate millions of student loan debtors without giving them instant freedom, but rather freedom from their debt earned over time.

Here are exclusions that would allow the Restructuring of a Debt without having to declare a Default.

Exclusion Number 1. Cap all student loan interest rate charges at 100% of the value of the actual loan. If a Student borrows 50,000 dollars, the most they can be charged in interest is 50,000 dollars. Once that figure is reached, the remaining debt is paid off with no more interest being charged.

Exclusion Number 2. Eliminate all future Interest Rate Charges once a Student Loan has aged a certain amount (to be determined by a think tank).

Exclusion Number 3. Eliminate all future Interest Rate Charges after a certain amount of time if a Student maintained a C Average, or had excellent attendance, or had a major medical issue for themselves or had to commit to taking care of a family member. 

Even with these incentives added in, it would be important to not penalize students by making the monthly repayment terms so high that they default on the freezing of interest rate charges going forward.

While these Exclusions could result in less money available for Student Loans, or perhaps the Interest Rates on new Student Loans might go up, the Interest Rate caps ultimately serve the same purpose, they prevent scenarios where Students keep making monthly payments to their Student Loans but the Loan debt actually increases.

Lets keep in mind that this concept is a compromise to Student Loan Debt Forgiveness, and doing nothing.

Welcome to Simple Math Detective.

Welcome to Simple Math Detective. Sometimes the best solutions involve understanding simple math.