The Slav's Baseball Blog - BASEBALL 24-7-365
The Slav's Blog about anything relating to the great game of baseball
- and other less important issues from outside the diamond.
The best baseball blog that you have never heard of.
1. If you cannot achieve equality of performance among people born to the same parents and raised under the same roof, how realistic is it to expect to achieve it across broader and deeper social divisions? …… 2. If there is not equality of outcomes among people born to the same parents and raised under the same roof, why should equality of outcomes be expected—or assumed—when conditions are not nearly so comparable?
Ever since the days of John Maynard Keynes, economics has been cursed by the notion that human action should be distilled into numbers, which then become a "pretense to knowledge" for central planner types. In many collegiate economics courses, it's hard to tell where the math leaves off and the actual economics begins. To Cowperthwaite, the planner's quest for statistics was anathema. So he refused to compile them. When Friedman asked him in 1963 about the "paucity of statistics," Cowperthwaite answered, "If I let them compute those statistics, they'll want to use them for planning."
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
WordPress.com
Dan Mitchell posted: "I've written before about the tremendous success of Hong Kong. The jurisdiction routinely is ranked as being the world's freest economy, and its fiscal policy is a role model for spending restraint. One reason Hong Kong has prospered is that it has enj"
One reason Hong Kong has prospered is that it has enjoyed a policy of benign neglect, particularly when it was a British colony prior to 1997. More specifically, the United Kingdom by happenstance appointed John Cowperthwaite to help govern the colony. And his view of governing was to leave things alone.
...while the mother country lurched in a socialist direction at home under Clement Attlee, Cowperthwaite became an advocate of what he called "positive non-interventionism" in HK.
Cowperthwaite was especially wise in realizing that collecting statistics was risky because advocates of big government would want to justify and implement intervention on the basis of data.
To Cowperthwaite, the planner's quest for statistics was anathema. So he refused to compile them. When Friedman asked him in 1963 about the "paucity of statistics," Cowperthwaite answered, "If I let them compute those statistics, they'll want to use them for planning."
This may seem to be an arcane point, but imagine how much freer we would be if Washington didn't have access to our private information.
Consider these examples.
The burdensome modern income tax would be impossible if government didn't have information on our income and assets.
Failed interventions such as No Child Left Behind and Common Core would be impractical if Washington didn't have education statistics.
Our medical system wouldn't be messed up by Obamacare, Medicaid, and Medicare if politicians didn't have data about healthcare.
The list is almost endless.
And now we have another disturbing example. As the New York Postreports, the Obama Administration is engaging in an intrusive and Orwellian data-collection exercise as a precursor for central planning of the economy and manipulation of private behavior.
Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama's racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document "inequalities" between minorities and whites. This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases.
Why are they doing all this snooping? To justify more intervention, of course.
The bureaucrats are guided by the theory of disparate impact, which is based on the absurd notion that any difference in racial statistics somehow is a sign of malignant racism.
So it doesn't matter if there isn't any evidence of racism. It doesn't matter if there's any suggestion of actual discrimination.
What matters if that a bunch of bureaucrats want power to micro-manage the economy and control our lives.
Here's what's happening, for instance, in housing.
...the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing database, which the Department of Housing and Urban Development rolled out earlier this month to racially balance the nation, ZIP code by ZIP code. It will map every US neighborhood by four racial groups — white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino — and publish "geospatial data" pinpointing racial imbalances. The agency proposes using nonwhite populations of 50% or higher as the threshold for classifying segregated areas. Federally funded cities deemed overly segregated will be pressured to change their zoning laws to allow construction of more subsidized housing in affluent areas in the suburbs, and relocate inner-city minorities to those predominantly white areas.
By the way, if you think this is just hyperbole, the federal government has been using Westchester County in New York as a guinea pig based on residential housing data. With terrible results, as you can imagine.
After reading Jim's piece, I no longer want to merely abolish HUD. I want to bulldoze the building, cover the ground with six feet of broken glass and rusty nails, and then add a foot of salt to make sure nothing can possibly spring forth again.
In the 1990s, the feds were embarrassed by skyrocketing crime rates in public housing—up to 10 times the national average, according to HUD studies and many newspaper reports. The government's response was to hand out vouchers to residents…, dispersing them to safer and more upscale locales. Section 8's budget soared to $19 billion this year from $7 billion in 1994. HUD now picks up the rent for more than two million households nationwide; tenants pay 30% of their income toward rent and utilities while the feds pay the rest. Section 8 recipients receive monthly rental subsidies of up to $2,851 in the Stamford-Norwalk, Conn., area, $2,764 in Honolulu and $2,582 in Columbia, Md. But the dispersal of public housing residents to quieter neighborhoods has failed to weed out the criminal element that made life miserable for most residents of the projects. "Homicide was simply moved to a new location, not eliminated," concluded University of Louisville criminologist Geetha Suresh in a 2009 article in Homicide Studies. In Louisville, Memphis, and other cities, violent crime skyrocketed in neighborhoods where Section 8 recipients resettled. After a four-year investigation, the Indianapolis Housing Authority (IHA) in 2006 linked 80% of criminal homicides in Marion County, Ind., to individuals fraudulently obtaining federal assistance "in either the public housing program or the Section 8 program administered by the agency."
In other words, the federal government decided that it wasn't doing enough damage by being a slumlord. It then decided to directly subsidize rents (often at scandalously high levels), often for the benefit of criminals.
Needless to say, this is the wrong approach. Instead of letting bureaucrats in Washington act as some sort of national zoning commission, we should shut down HUD and get the federal government completely out of the housing sector.
And, more broadly, we should heed the wise words of John Cowperthwaite, who helped Hong Kong become rich by denying bureaucrats access to data.
File this under we know more than has been proven. Finally, the socialists are grudgingly realizing that while socialism, Keynesian economic theory and big government may work in theory, in practice, not so much.
"The European Central Bank may have just disproved the entire European big-government model in their recent release of an exhaustive study analyzing the relationship between government size and economic growth. After reviewing a massive 108 countries over a 38 year time period, they came to a shocking and definitive conclusion:
Big government is bad for economic growth!
“Our results show a significant negative effect of the size of government on growth.”
“Interestingly, government consumption is consistently detrimental to output growth irrespective of the country sample considered (OECD, emerging and developing countries).”"
Now, for most people who operate based on common sense and formulating their opinions from the natural world they experience every day, this is not a shocking result; but, unfortunately, many economists and others need 44 page research studies and sophisticated differential equation models (see pages 31-33) to conclude what most people have known and said for quite some time.
As a wise man once said, "The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus." (see video below)
America needs to be a place where all of us can feel a part of the American dream. But it will not happen by dividing us into racial groups. It will not happen by trying to turn the poor against the rich. It will not happen by asking Americans to accept what is immoral and wrong in the name of tolerance. - J.C. Watts
A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both. - Milton Friedman
This week, aside from Sheriff Joe Biden telling us that the stimulus worked, we get this garbage in, garbage out from economists Mark Zandi and Fed apologist Alan Blinder, titled "How We Ended the Great Recession".
So this is what we get from our government, two economists who predicted the stimulus would be hugely beneficial, conduct a study that concludes that the stimulus was hugely beneficial. HOW STUNNINGLY INEPT.
DEFINITION OF CONFIRMATION BIAS: Confirmation bias (or myside bias) is a tendency for people to prefer information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses, independently of whether they are true.
Buried in the minutiae of the study is the admission that what the Federal Reserve did actually had more impact than our tax dollars.
Also, the authors compare the "success" against a set of alternatives that suggest that the administration and the Federal Reserve just "do nothing" in response to the collapse of the financial system and the economy.
SERIOUSLY?!? Is that the standard we are looking for? Is that where the bar is set? IT WAS BETTER THAN DOING NOTHING?? That's even worse than, "close enough for government work".
The larger problem the "useful tools" in the administration have is that the facts (economic data) keep flying in their faces. My Dad used to say "don't let the facts get in the way of a good story". This is often described as "anchoring" instead of the term confirmation bias. I just hope that they don't pull the whole economy down again by remaining "anchored" to what appear to be failed policy choices.
This is a pretty accurate synopsis of the situation from back in January 2010. Zandi was a goofball then, he's more of one now.
The Obama administration has explained the dire employment situation thusly:
The economy was way worse than anybody thought
Their predictions were in line with other economists
Things would have been worse without the stimulus
All in all, a nice deflection of blame from themselves (and usually on to the preceding administration). But history isn’t so kind.
You see, back around the time that the Obama team put forth their errant predictions, a fellow named Mark Zandi (Moody’s Economy) made a similar set of predictions using an actual economic model. And here’s how he did:
Yes, your eyes do not deceive you – the unemployment rate is closely tracking Zandi’s predictions for the non-stimulus case. This leads me to the following conclusions (which are somewhat at odds with the administration’s spin):
The economy was exactly as bad as some economists thought
The Obama team’s predictions were much more optimistic than other economists’
The stimulus has had no effect
You can believe the spin or the facts you see/feel for yourself.
My conclusions would echo those of one of the commentators to the story and flow from the wisdom of Milton Fridman:
“I think the government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem and very often makes the problem worse.”
“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.”
The discrepancy may be explained by either the economy being in worse shape than economists thought at the outset (the Obama excuse, even though we were told this was the worst thing since the Great Depression). In this case the model of the economy without stimulus is wrong.
Alternatively, the discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the model generating the effects of stimulus is wrong. The GIGO argument. Either argument can be made and supported by facts and figures, ultimately we have elections that decide who is right and who is wrong.
We heard the mantra that these stimulus funds would go to "shovel-ready" projects that would have a near immediate effect on jobs and the economy. That has proven to be false at worst or understated at best.
The problem IMO was that the anticipated stimulus multiplier effect was muted or strangled by the harsh anti-business rhetoric and punitive regulatory euphoria that has created a climate where in effect CAPITAL IS ON STRIKE.
Why would a businessman hire, invest and strive for climate in an environment where the costs to hire are increasing, the incentive to invest is disappearing and the profits, if any, generated from investing and hiring are going to be demonized as ill-gotten gains or confiscated by an angry, greedy business partner by the name of Uncle Sam, who is motivated to "level the playing field" and will take your profits to aid those of your less competent competitor. (See GM, Chrysler, Ford)
Put that in your model and smoke it, Zandi!!
It is interesting to see that the political contributions of businessmen and women appear to be heading in a different pocket lately. And Team Obama has taken notice. Also, interesting now that the Obama team, which benefited greatly from contributions from these same businesses to get elected, now criticizes these same businesses for appearing to have buyers remorse. Isn't that their right, sir? To change their mind?
-----
MORE GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT THAT EMENATES FROM THOSE ENTRUSTED WITH YOUR TAX DOLLARS:
CBO Admits It Ignored the Economy’s Actual Performance
Published on March 23, 2010 by Brian Riedl
1) RESULTS PRE-DETERMINED? THAT'S NOT TOO FRAUDULENT OR SELF-SERVING - NICE PR JOB
CBO Confirms Its Methodology
In a recent speech to the National Association of Business Economics, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf confirmed this by stating:
[W]e don't think one can learn much from watching the evolution of particular components of GDP [gross domestic product] over the last few quarters about the effects of the stimulus … so we fall back on repeating the sort of analysis we did before. And we tried to be very explicit about it that it is essentially repeating the same exercise we did rather than an independent check on it.[1]
When asked if this means that any actual underperformance of the stimulus would fail to show up in the CBO's stimulus jobs count, Elmendorf replied "That's right." This means the 1.5 million jobs saved estimate was pre-determined.
Of course, the stimulus was originally promised to create (not just save) more than 3 million jobs.[2] Instead, the economy has since lost more than 3 million additional net jobs. The abject failure of the stimulus policies recommended by Keynesian economic models should induce some fundamental re-analysis of these models' assumptions. Instead, the CBO is re-releasing the same jobs analysis--with the same economic assumptions--that they had used a year ago.
2. GIGO - GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT - WHAT IF THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS ARE WRONG?
The "Begging the Question" Fallacy
The CBO's conclusion that the stimulus created jobs is based on an economic model that began with the premise that all stimulus bills create jobs. In other words, the conclusion is already assumed as a premise. Logicians call this the fallacy of begging the question. Mathematicians call it assuming what you are trying to prove.
More specifically, the CBO's model started by automatically assuming that government spending increases GDP by pre-set multipliers, such as:
Every $1 of government spending that directly purchases goods and services ultimately raises the
GDP by $1.75;
Every $1 of government spending sent to state and local governments for infrastructure ultimately raises GDP by $1.75;
Every $1 of government spending sent to state and local governments for non-infrastructure spending ultimately raises GDP by $1.25; and
Every $1 of government spending sent to an individual as a transfer payment ultimately raises GDP by $1.45.[3]
(Note that all CBO figures in this paper represent the midpoint between their high and low estimates.)
Then the CBO plugged the stimulus provisions into the multipliers above, came up with a total increase in GDP of 2.6 percent, and then converted that additional GDP into 1.5 million jobs.
The problem here is obvious. Once the CBO decided to assume that every dollar of government spending increased GDP by the multipliers above, its conclusion that the stimulus saved jobs was pre-ordained.
The economy could have lost 30 million jobs, and the model would have said that the economy would otherwise have lost 31.5 million jobs without the stimulus. An asteroid could have hit the United States, wiping out everyone outside of Washington, D.C., and (as long as Washington still spent the stimulus money) the CBO's economic model would have produced the same stimulus jobs data. There is no adjustment made to reflect what actually happened in the economy after the stimulus was enacted.
3. CONFIRMATION BIAS, ANCHORING - CALL IT WHAT YOU WILL - MOST PEOPLE FEEL LIKE IT'S JUST PLAIN OLD FASHIONED B.S.
Test the Multipliers
The debate over the efficacy of Keynesian stimulus is essentially a debate over the correct multipliers. Some believe the multipliers are high[4]; others believe they are as low as zero[5] (or even negative). Testing the stimulus requires testing the multipliers. Yet by simply assuming large multipliers, the CBO effectively pre-ordained its conclusion that the stimulus worked regardless of what actually happened in the economy.
Elmendorf has confirmed that the CBO's stimulus analysis consists of little more than re-releasing its pre-stimulus projections. Policymakers and analysts should not mistake this analysis for an actual examination of the stimulus's impact.
And this is why the people they call the Tea Party are gaining in numbers, not because they are racists, not because they do not want top see our President and therefore our country succeed. But because they see and feel these things that are going horribly wrong and they have had enough.
This hit my e-mail last week from James Quinn who publishes the blog The Burning Platform http://theburningplatform.com/
The Burning Platform has posted a new item, 'NAACP - MOST RACIST ORGANIZATION IN AMERICA'
Again, I would like to reiterate that the NAACP, backed up by the hate spewing liberal media pundits on MSNBC and CNN, are just mouthpieces for the Obama agenda. Obama despises white people. Whenever his policies fail and the country is clearly headed downward, he will pull the race card. It is the liberal gameplan. They expect us white people to back down like we have for decades. No more. The Tea Party is about fiscal responsibility. The racists are in the NAACP and the Obama White House. Funny that black men like Thomas Sowell and Deroy Murdock aren’t invited on MSNBC to put Olbermann, Madow, and Matthews in their place. The liberal agenda is hate, racism and division.
Liberals fear the Tea Party. They should. We’re coming to get them.
He defends the Tea Party by noting that
"Consider the Tea Party’s Contract from America, a pledge to which it holds its endorsed candidates. (TheContract.org.)
Among 10 planks, it advocates a single-rate tax, a two-thirds-vote requirement for tax hikes,
ObamaCare’s repeal, and the defeat of cap-and-trade legislation.
Nothing is even remotely related to race, ethnicity or identity. Wouldn’t bigots devote at least one of 10 reforms to something racial?
The Tea Party movement avoids racial issues and instead advances lower taxes and spending and greater fiscal discipline. These issues are neither black nor white. They are green."
This is what I've been saying about the Tea Party all along.
If you really want to get a gander at a wholly racist organization, look no further than the Black Congressional Caucus, whose members basically started this "Tea Party is racist" nonsense.
The Congressional Black Caucus is an organization representing the black members of the United States Congress. Membership is exclusive to blacks,[1]
I have to agree with J.C. Watts here as well.
Watts said of his refusal to join the caucus, "...they said that I had sold out and Uncle Tom. And I said well, they deserve to have that view. But I have my thoughts. And I think they're race-hustling poverty pimps."
White members of Congress have never been welcomed into the caucus, although CBC by-laws specifically prohibit any discrimination.
And then there was the infamous Ralph Nader incident.
Sorry, in terms of level of overt racism compare and contrast the overly trumped up version of the congressman walking the gauntlet of Tea Partiers, up the Capitol steps to sign the Health Care bill with this incident.
Oh, you never heard about this incident, or the Sharpton / Brawley smear of NYPD officers. No surprise there.
Ralph Nader incident
In 2004, independent presidential candidate and consumer activist Ralph Nader attended a meeting with the Caucus which turned into a shouting exchange. The caucus urged Nader to give up his presidential run, fearing that it could hurt John Kerry, the Democratic Party's nominee. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) called the upcoming election "a life or death matter" for the Caucus members' constituents. Nader accused Congressman Mel Watt of twice uttering an "obscene racial epithet" towards Nader; he alleged that Watt said: "You're just another arrogant white man – telling us what we can do – it's all about your ego – another f—king arrogant white
man." Watt never offered an apology.[9]
Nader wrote to the Caucus afterwards:
"Instead, exclamations at the meeting... end[ed] with the obscene racist epithet repeated twice by Yale Law School alumnus Congressman Melvin Watt of North Carolina. One member of your Caucus called to apologize for the crudity of some of the members. I had expected an expression of regret or apology from Congressman Watt in the subsequent days after he had cooled down. After all there was absolutely no vocal or verbal provocation from me or from my associates, including Peter Miguel Camejo, to warrant such an outburst. In all my years of struggling for justice, especially for the deprived and downtrodden, has any legislator—white or black—used such language? I do not like double standards, especially since our premise for interactions must be equality of respect that has no room, as I responded to Mr. Watt, for playing the race card. Therefore, just as African-Americans demanded an apology from Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz and Senator Trent Lott—prior to their resignation and demotion respectively—for their racist remarks, I expect that you and others in the Caucus will exert your moral persuasion and request an apology from Congressman Watt. Please consider this also my request for such an expression—a copy of which is being forwarded directly to Mr. Watt's office."[10]
So all these factors contribute to the rise of the Tea Party movement. Not racism. Not black /white issues, green issues ($$$). These folks have sat back were not involved as much in politics as they maybe should have been. They allowed the discontented to drive the agenda. Well, good job losers, you've pushed the economic and political climate to the point where now successful and otherwise happy, contented people are pissed off. GOOD JOB, ASS-HATS.
They have put up with the entitlement culture, the ever increasing social safety net and the social justice programs grow way out of control. When times were good they really didn't pay too much attention to what was going on. Politics is always about "greasing the squeaky wheel" and these are folks that didn't have much to complain about. Now they do.
These are people that when times are good are the epitome of good, decent, caring, charitable people. But their patience and kindness and generosity does have it's limits -- it's breaking point -- and we are rapidly reaching that point in this environment.
SEE YOU IN NOVEMBER!!!
----
The other success that was touted this past week was the so-called Financial Regulatory Reform bill that was passed. Another gift form out leaders. I'll leave it to a well-respected bank analyst, Rochdale Securites Dick Bove, to give his take on the bill. It's right on the money.
How Wall Street Will Beat the New Financial Regulations - Yahoo! Finance
"What the law did was force the banks to rethink their business lines, their pricing strategies, their methodology for maintaining their balance sheet," banking analyst Dick Bove of Rochdale Securities said in an interview. "When they rethink it all, they will be able to offset all of the costs of this bill."
But crafty financial veterans already are finding loopholes in the law and banks likely will profit both in spite of and because of the reforms.
"If you had anyone who knew anything about the financial industry writing this law, that's one thing," said Bove, who has called the law one of the worst in US history. "But if you have a bunch of hysterics who were looking for political gain, you get something that was an abortion. All it did was increase the cost of banking in the United States relative to the cost of banking in other countries."
The banks' course of action likely will break down into four strategies:
1. Outfox the foxes
A harsh critic of the law, Bove is among the analysts who nevertheless believe banks will thrive. One big reason is because he thinks industry executives will show that they're smarter than the legislators who crafted financial reform, also known as FinReg.
Once again, thanks for nothing guys.
GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT.
Speaking of garbage, this is the prevailing opinion of the current administration, that the people of this country are too stupid to understand that all the data that confirms what people are feeling everyday is wrong and they are right. That is the problem, people are too stupid.
I really hope that we remember to add ALL incumbents to the unemployment lines this November. There isn't one of them that deserves to be re-elected.
They need to be defeated and I use that term in lieu of they need to be beaten, Mussolini-style.
The Italians didn't mess around when a politician preached false hope and fanciful dreams and then failed miserably to deliver (the trains did run on time, though). Maybe a little history repeating around here would do some of our congressmen and women, well. HAHAHAHHA.
FROM ANDREWCOSSACK.COM - MUSSOLINI'S FALL FROM GRACE:
After a summary execution, Mussolini’s corpse, along with those of his mistress and others, were dragged through the streets of Milan before being strung up at a gas station. Il Duce had previously expounded upon the idea:
“Every man dies the death which befits his character.”
KEEP THAT IN MIND, MY D.C. HOMIES AND REMEMBER WE'VE GOT OUR EYE ON YOU.
My thoughts on the current state of blogging, both the serious sites and the ones that are tongue in cheek or comedic in nature. It doesn't seem like such a long time ago that the daily newspaper was the family choice for gathering news about what was going on in their local communities. The TV news where we went for national and international news and sports information. Then came the cable revolution and niche channels came into our living rooms. If you wanted sports highlights, you didn't have to wait for the last three minutes of the 11:00 news broadcast, you could turn on this crazy, new channel called ESPN and get highlights every few hours.
The came the Internet and newspapers, magazines, radio and TV have all struggled to compartmentalize their content to capture a share of the browsers. Then came the phenomena called blogging and the world of MSM has never been the same since.
All these changes have done is allowed people the freedom to choose what is relevant to them as far as what they want to read and listen too and when they want to listen to it. We see the same phenomena with cell phones and individualized ring tones. The company or industry that doesn't adapt is relegated to the dustbin of American corporate history beside the Pony Express. Unfortunately, the old-line sports media appears to be going in that direction, albeit kicking and screaming all the way.
--------------------------------------------- FROM DEADSPIN: BOB COSTAS, BILL CONLIN, TONY KORNHISER, DAN SHAUGNESSY SUMMARY OF BLOG-HATERS
The percent of people who get their information solely from TV and/or a newspaper decreases by the day. Nowadays, you can't create your own stories any more or attempt to mold the world to fit your own agenda and expect to maintain any sort of credibility.
Can you imagine a more anti-American position to take than to be an advocate against the freedom of choice? But that is exactly what the MSM (Mainstream Media) as personified by the recent comments in sports by Costas, Conlin, et.al. against the proliferation of bloggers, especially in sports.
Excerpts from Milton Friedman: Rightful Patron Saint of Blogging:
The beauty of blogging is self regulation at its very best.
The “blogosphere” is like a little experimental universe validating consumer choice vs. regulation—and consumer choice has won a colossal victory.
Left to the free market of ideas and instant reader feedback, good writing, quality and reliability in blogging secures a readership and reputation solely on merit.
Friedman should be the patron saint of the Age of Blogging: people with brains, networks, and powers of self-expression don't wait for journalism degrees anymore to have an impact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comically, the same media that would question the credibility at bloggers by claiming the information is not vetted or credible comes from those who give us this type of behavior:
Will Albom's woes taint journalism?
Mitch Albom, the celebrated Detroit Free Press sports columnist who has been suspended for fudging facts in a recent piece, has a bigger name as one of the nation's best-selling authors
But Albom, who has been with the Free Press for 20 years, is taking a lashing from fellow journalists. They say he has revived the question of journalistic integrity after instances of deception by staffers at several major news outlets, including USA TODAY, The New York Times and CBS News.
Free Press editors didn't change Albom's copy. Now they and Albom are under investigation by the newspaper.
I guess you know what they see about people who live in glass houses. And I happen to like Mitch Albom, I think he's one of the best writers out there. It just goes to show that it can happen to the best of them. I just wonder why these guys feel so threatened by others out there who are just trying to mimic what they do and have a little bit of fun at the same time.
I guess I missed the part where the "real" Yankees felt threatened by Billy Crystal's at-bat or felt anything but honored or flattered by it or by him wanting to do it or the team for accommodating him.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- FROM THE SPORTS PICKLE: A MORE HUMOROUS LOOK AT BLOGGING http://www.sportspickle.com/features/volume7/2008-0227-basement.html
Unemployed Journalist Forced to Move Into His Mom’s Basement
Washington Times sports reporter Terry Corman will be forced to move into his mom’s basement after budget cuts at the paper left him without a job.
“The Internet and all of those bloggers are killing the newspaper industry,” says Corman. “It’s a plague. Who reads that crap anyway? I can write a wrap-up article of a college baseball game with the best of them. But no one wants that sort of important sports news anymore. I guess it just goes to show how stupid the public has become.”
Unable to find another paper looking to hire a college baseball – and, in a pinch, college softball and tennis – reporter, Corman has been forced to put his house on the market and will move into his mother’s basement next week.
(click hyperlink to see entire story)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this corner, the prototypical left-wing, socialist, pseudo-intellectual. On the stage, weighing in with one Nobel Prize in Economics and a lifetime defending libertarian, free-market, capitalist ideals, Milton Friedman.
If your sqeamish or can't stand to see one side get intellectually pummeled, please do not watch. Don't worry, he'll be OK. No dumb-assed college kids were significantly harmed in the making of this video. He appears to be too stupid to know he's wrong anyway.
NOBEL PRIZE WINNING FREE-MARKET, ECONOMIST MILTON FRIEDMAN VS. SOCIALIST PHIL DONAHUE
CS - So much fun to see a real genius match wits with a pseudo, self appointed genius. It's really not much of a match-up. A free-market capitalist versus a socialist. Donahue looks like the old RCA dog, with the tilted head. It looks like he was hearing sound for the first time.
Yet the Fed (Federal Reserve) still clings to the “core rate” of inflation, which strips out the essential costs of life when setting monetary policy. (CS - But they don't lie! And they are never called to account for the lies and the destructive effect those lies have on ordinary peoples lives)
As the famous economist John Maynard Keynes used to say, “By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debase the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”
"Civil rights used to be about treating everyone the same. But today some people are so used to special treatment that equal treatment is considered to be discrimination." ~Economist Thomas Sowell
1. Joey Bart 6-2, 215 C Power arm and a power bat, playing a premium defensive position. Good catch and throw skills.
2. Heliot Ramos 6-2, 185 OF Potential high-ceiling player the Giants have been looking for. Great bat speed, early returns were impressive.
3. Chris Shaw 6-3. 230 1B Lefty power bat, limited defensively to 1B, Matt Adams comp?
4. Tyler Beede 6-4, 215 RHP from Vanderbilt projects as top of the rotation starter when he works out his command/control issues. When he misses, he misses by a bunch.
5. Stephen Duggar 6-1, 170 CF Another toolsy, under-achieving OF in the Gary Brown mold, hoping for better results.
6. Sandro Fabian 6-0, 180 OF Dominican signee from 2014, shows some pop in his bat. Below average arm and lack of speed should push him towards LF.
7. Aramis Garcia 6-2, 220 C from Florida INTL projects as a good bat behind the dish with enough defensive skill to play there long-term
8. Heath Quinn 6-2, 190 OF Strong hitter, makes contact with improving approach at the plate. Returns from hamate bone injury.
9. Garrett Williams 6-1, 205 LHP Former Oklahoma standout, Giants prototype, low-ceiling, high-floor prospect.
10. Shaun Anderson 6-4, 225 RHP Large frame, 3.36 K/BB rate. Can start or relieve
11. Jacob Gonzalez 6-3, 190 3B Good pedigree, impressive bat for HS prospect.
12. Seth Corry 6-2 195 LHP Highly regard HS pick. Was mentioned as possible chip in high profile trades.
13. C.J. Hinojosa 5-10, 175 SS Scrappy IF prospect in the mold of Kelby Tomlinson, just gets it done.
14. Garett Cave 6-4, 200 RHP He misses a lot of bats and at times, the plate. 13 K/9 an 5 B/9. Wild thing.
2019 MLB Draft - Top HS Draft Prospects
1. Bobby Witt, Jr. 6-1,185 SS Colleyville Heritage HS (TX) Oklahoma commit. Outstanding defensive SS who can hit. 6.4 speed in 60 yd. Touched 97 on mound. Son of former major leaguer. Five tool potential.
2. Riley Greene 6-2, 190 OF Haggerty HS (FL) Florida commit.Best HS hitting prospect. LH bat with good eye, plate discipline and developing power.
3. C.J. Abrams 6-2, 180 SS Blessed Trinity HS (GA) High-ceiling athlete. 70 speed with plus arm. Hitting needs to develop as he matures. Alabama commit.
4. Reece Hinds 6-4, 210 SS Niceville HS (FL) Power bat, committed to LSU. Plus arm, solid enough bat to move to 3B down the road. 98MPH arm.
5. Daniel Espino 6-3, 200 RHP Georgia Premier Academy (GA) LSU commit. Touches 98 on FB with wipe out SL.
2019 MLB Draft - Top College Draft Prospects
1. Adley Rutschman C Oregon State Plus defender with great arm. Excellent receiver plus a switch hitter with some pop in the bat.
2. Shea Langliers C Baylor Excelent throw and catch skills with good pop time. Quick bat, uses all fields approach with some pop.
3. Zack Thompson 6-2 LHP Kentucky Missed time with an elbow issue. FB up to 95 with plenty of secondary stuff.
4. Matt Wallner 6-5 OF Southern Miss Run producing bat plus mid to upper 90's FB closer. Power bat from the left side, athletic for size.
5. Nick Lodolo LHP TCU Tall LHP, 95MPH FB and solid breaking stuff.
