UPDATED with link to chat page.
I’m back on the chat today, although I don’t plan for a marathon – just a quickie for Valentine’s Day.
Also, for your reading pleasure, a strong short piece over at Squawking Baseball on how it’s the government that’s broken when we’re looking to blame someone for public funding of stadia.
“just a quickie for Valentine’s Day”?
-that’s what she said
Interesting read, but let’s face it: municipality officials are politicians, not businesspeople. Most of them have no clue how a bond sale works, which happens to be the way the majority of these projects are funded. While most of these projects are wasteful, politicians see them as resume builders, and not much else. Anyway, Andrew Zimbalist does a much better job of explaining this point than I.
Keith, looking forward to the chat, it’s been awhile.
Speaking of populist policies, an article (mildly)related to the corn-syrup subsidies post a few weeks back.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article3353735.ece
I assume you guys won’t be getting this in the US
Damn you Steven, that was going to be my line! 😉
Sugar subsidies are …. a disaster on so many levels, its not even funny.
I agree with the fact that public funding of stadia is a huge problem, but to conclude that the issue likes with something as black and white as the dichotomy between a welfare state and a free-market economy is ridiculous. That’s a huge jump to make. I vehemently disagree with public funding, but to say that the problem lies with big-government liberals is silly. It’s a bipartisan problem. Extremely liberal cities (such as San Francisco) have built completely privately funded ballparks. I’m a socialist and I would never agree with spending money to line owners’ pockets. People like me believe in government intervention to help the poorest and most unfortunate, not team owners. The whole logic behind the point is fallacious. I’m not saying that I agree with the way this government spends its money, because I don’t. But that’s my issue with this particular government (and the two-party system), not with a welfare-state in general. Look at Europe, populated with welfare-states. Their big stadia are privately funded, and their governments are run more transparently (Italy, notwithstanding). The problem is our particular politicians, not a big government versus small government.
Saw in the chat that you’ll be in San Diego. You should try South Beach Bar & Grill in Ocean Beach for fish tacos this time. I highly recommend both the lobster and mahi. Unlike World Famous, they don’t put cheese on their fish tacos!
Thanks, Chris, I did see your note in the chat but didn’t know what “OB” meant.
Keith, I just have a quick question with regard to something you said in your chat this afternoon. Perhaps I am missing something, but when someone (I am assuming a Mariners apologist) tried to explain why the Mariners exceeded their Pythagorean record last year, you said, “People love to try to explain away divergences between Pyth records and actual W-L records. It doesn’t work.”
However, a few questions later you gave an explanation for why the Rockies exceeded their Pythagorean record last year.
Again, perhaps I’m confused, but which is your opinion: you can or cannot explain variances between Pythagorean records and actual W-L records?
You can not post hoc rationalize away a difference between PythW-L and W-L by cherrypicking games throughout a season that seem to support/undermine your point.
I agree that you cannot eliminate particular games (such as blowouts by particular pitchers, which seems to be the favorite method of Mariners supporters), but your approach of eliminating particular games won by the Rockies because they were against opponents who had nothing to play for does not seem that far removed from that same approach. I understand there is indeed a difference, but it seems like a rather fine line between the two.