Sabermetrics and Wall St. - interesting article Topic

This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Capitalism strikes again!
3/26/2015 11:38 AM
This is where the article drives off the road and becomes 180 degrees wrong:

"Despite the Phillies' complaints, the draft, a system designed to funnel money away from workers and keep it in the pockets of ownership and management, is as American and as capitalistic as it gets. Baseball's shift from an anything-goes amateur market to the bureaucratic and centralized draft most resembles the process that established Wall Street as it exists today: Morganization."

Morganization or as Rockefeller called it, "combination" is not American free enterprise. Rockefeller was almost imprisoned for what he accomplished. It is rather, the work of something akin to fascism and almost always has to do with gaining: 1. a protected status by government intervention and involvement and, 2. securing especially favorable financing through the age-old, extremely corrupt central banking system stemming from Europe (established by royals and that other infamous family, name beginning with the letter "R.").

That system is not economic freedom (which Marx and Marxists call "capitalism") but collectivism. Thus, having corrupted freedom, it becomes the straw man for the other side of collectivism's coin, socialism. And whether the neo-fascists or the neo-Marxists are in power, the central cartel collective and its systemic corruption reap the rewards of the labor of people who either think they're free or think they're striving for it.

America was instead built upon the idea that markets should be kept free, especially free of government or bank cartel manipulation, and nationally guarded, not to play favorites, but to allow natural competition and natural opportunity to allow wealth to develop freely among an people engaging in the intercourse of commerce as they each choose, based on their own resources. And that is how America has worked to become the most thriving nation in the world. That kind of minimalist guardianship is how regulation should work, instead of what we see now, where America's and most nations' regulatory systems are "captured," by cartel collectivism, on an increasingly global scale.

So, I don't suggest drinking the socialist Kool-Aid of confusing true, American free enterprise with the orchestrated corruption collectivist "capitalism." And it is time to get beyond the manufactured, Orwellian-scale, false dichotomy of that perversion of freedom against it's even more directly corrupt "antithesis," of collectivist statism.

3/26/2015 9:11 PM (edited)
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
The free market works when nonparticipation is a legitimate option. That is to say, when we are discussing items that are not necessities for the given units (in general, we discuss what's needed to survive.) Because with nonparticipation being an option, greed is suppressed because prices and ideas need to remain attractive to potential users as well as being competitive with other similar products.

The free market has issues when we look at things that we MUST have. We MUST have basic food, and prices have to be kept artificially low by farm subsidies in order to be affordable, and in many cases people still struggle (because they're not paid enough, but that's a separate issue.) We MUST have healthcare and we see how we have historically struggled with it -- while the PPACA is an improvement, it still leaves a few major issues, especially in states that refused to expand Medicaid, cutting off their nose (their poorest citizens) to spite their face (the President).

In baseball, the "unit" is a ballclub, and players are a necessity. A club can't exist without players. (It can exist without GOOD players, but a team that deliberately chooses to suck is bad for the game.)  Tanking is not an issue in real-life MLB because the draft is an utter crapshoot except for the once-in-a-blue-moon Stephen Strasburg pick. In HBD potentials are probably much more reliable (I couldn't say for sure, though, as I don't play it.)  So I stand by my statement that baseball could use a different outlook. Baseball would be best off if all 30 teams had a legitimate chance to win any year with proper management, scouring, development, etc. rather than teams that outspend everyone else consistently being at the top (while bottom-paying teams *can* do better, the trend is noticeable)
3/30/2015 12:16 PM

Spend just a few days driving in a place with strong centrally planned traffic controls (like, say, anywhere in Switzerland) and then spend a few days in someplace without (like, say, much of India) and then try with a straight face to make the case that there is ANYTHING preferable about the latter.

3/31/2015 9:53 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
12 Next ▸
Sabermetrics and Wall St. - interesting article Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.