Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Updated Thoughts on Halladay
where there is smoke, there is fire. this morning on sportscenter, buster olney said the phillies are the team with the best position to land halladay and all we would have to give up is a pitching prospect (drebek or even happ), jason donald (path to the majors blocked by the phillies stellar infield), and someone else (most likely). and this afternoon ruben amaro addressed the media over the position the team is in and danced around the subject of halladay, prospects, and pedro (i'll go on the record here with my thoughts on pedro coming to the phillies: bad move if they fail to land halladay and fall back on pedro. he is washed-up. dunzo. fin. however, this is where economics comes in - the phillies might balk at their payroll going much higher than the $13o million it is now and pedro is rumored to be asking $5 mil [which would be pro-rated]. i really, really, really hope that the economics of this don't doom halladay and that if halladay falls through, the team has a backup plan other than pedro martinez).
A First In American History
one of the reasons why the united states came into being was because king george III and parliament levied unfair taxes on the colonies. this has been a common theme throughout american history, and americans, more so than our european counterparts, are generally tax-adverse. we even needed a constitutional amendment to institute a national income tax.
so, in what i believe is a first in american history, we actually have an industry, a multi-billion dollar industry no less, that wants to be taxed. the founding fathers would be rolling around in their graves! but what industry, you ask, could be so foolish? i'll give you a hint: its not big oil, nor is it the auto industry. its not investment banks. and its not the construction industry.
give up? its *gasp!* the marijuana (aka the demon weed, reefer, grass, smoke, ganja, herb, wacky tobbacky) industry. again, in the history of the united states has there ever been an industry that has so desperately wanted to be taxed and regulated? estimates for california alone place the value of the crop at $13.8 billion. $13.8 billion. that is a lot of money. taxed at 10% you are talking about over $1 billion for the state of california. this doesn't even take into account the other industries surrounding the sale and consumption of marijuana. downtown oakland is already seeing the benefits of an agglomeration economy emerging around the cannabis co-ops operating in the oaksterdam section of the city (strategy for urban renewal, anyone?). this is something that could be replicated in every state in the union. bringing the underground marijuana economy out of the shadows into the light will help farmers, consumers, states, prison systems, and countless others.
reasonable people can disagree over the health benefits of marijuana or the effect that some argue it has on society (they are wrong on this point...responsible adults can consume marijuana and not have negative effects on society, but whatever) but you cannot argue that there is not a valid economic reason to, in the words of peter tosh, "legalize it".
so, in what i believe is a first in american history, we actually have an industry, a multi-billion dollar industry no less, that wants to be taxed. the founding fathers would be rolling around in their graves! but what industry, you ask, could be so foolish? i'll give you a hint: its not big oil, nor is it the auto industry. its not investment banks. and its not the construction industry.
give up? its *gasp!* the marijuana (aka the demon weed, reefer, grass, smoke, ganja, herb, wacky tobbacky) industry. again, in the history of the united states has there ever been an industry that has so desperately wanted to be taxed and regulated? estimates for california alone place the value of the crop at $13.8 billion. $13.8 billion. that is a lot of money. taxed at 10% you are talking about over $1 billion for the state of california. this doesn't even take into account the other industries surrounding the sale and consumption of marijuana. downtown oakland is already seeing the benefits of an agglomeration economy emerging around the cannabis co-ops operating in the oaksterdam section of the city (strategy for urban renewal, anyone?). this is something that could be replicated in every state in the union. bringing the underground marijuana economy out of the shadows into the light will help farmers, consumers, states, prison systems, and countless others.
reasonable people can disagree over the health benefits of marijuana or the effect that some argue it has on society (they are wrong on this point...responsible adults can consume marijuana and not have negative effects on society, but whatever) but you cannot argue that there is not a valid economic reason to, in the words of peter tosh, "legalize it".
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
The Phillies MUST Get Halladay
the phillies have been at a juncture like this for the past as many seasons as i can remember. there is always a point around the beginning of the all-star break through shortly after when the team must make a decision: how do i get a new starting pitcher. this season the decision is more acute than in years past due to the injury of brett myers and the generally underwhelming performance of the pitching staff this year from the starters to the bullpen. in years past the team has not made a major move, getting guys like moyer and blanton while eschewing the bigger name pitchers like sabathia.
but this year we have an opportunity, it seems, to pick up roy halladay from the blue jays. halladay is an exceptional pitcher and is one of the only guys in the majors who pitches complete games these days. to give up a kyle drebek or one of our other pitching prospects and a few other guys is worth the price of halladay. the phillies actually have a decent stock of young arms, so to part with one of them to acquire a cy-young caliber pitcher for 2 years (he is signed through 2010 and while it would balloon the payroll some, i imagine the phillies management would be happy with another world championship, those being the cash-cows that they are) would not be a bad thing considering it would put the phillies in the drivers seat to repeat as champs and do all the things i outlined in the parentheses.
also, by getting halladay now, we make the first move in the pitching market and have the chance to set the price for pitchers at the deadline. while i like blanton and what he has done fior the team, he came at a pretty high price (or so i recall). make your investment really worth it this time - get halladay.
i trust that ruben amaro studied well under pat gillick. but all of the situations described above were gillick's moves. now its amaro's turn. will amaro emulate his mentor, or will he strike out on a path of his own? we will see...
but this year we have an opportunity, it seems, to pick up roy halladay from the blue jays. halladay is an exceptional pitcher and is one of the only guys in the majors who pitches complete games these days. to give up a kyle drebek or one of our other pitching prospects and a few other guys is worth the price of halladay. the phillies actually have a decent stock of young arms, so to part with one of them to acquire a cy-young caliber pitcher for 2 years (he is signed through 2010 and while it would balloon the payroll some, i imagine the phillies management would be happy with another world championship, those being the cash-cows that they are) would not be a bad thing considering it would put the phillies in the drivers seat to repeat as champs and do all the things i outlined in the parentheses.
also, by getting halladay now, we make the first move in the pitching market and have the chance to set the price for pitchers at the deadline. while i like blanton and what he has done fior the team, he came at a pretty high price (or so i recall). make your investment really worth it this time - get halladay.
i trust that ruben amaro studied well under pat gillick. but all of the situations described above were gillick's moves. now its amaro's turn. will amaro emulate his mentor, or will he strike out on a path of his own? we will see...
Labels:
joe blanton,
pat gillick,
phillies,
roy halladay,
ruben amaro
Sunday, July 5, 2009
More Palin Thoughts
so sarah palin's lawyers have now threatened to sue anyone who dares disagree with her in public. sounds like how scientology deals with their critics.
one refrain that i have constantly heard from her side is that she despises attacks against her family and that influenced her decision to step down. i can understand that, but seriously, can anyone actually point to an attack leveled at palin's family? sure, david letterman made an off-color joke about one of her kids, but i recall john mccain doing the same to a certain chelsea clinton. so, aside from that, who has been attacking palin's family? the blogger who photoshopped a different head on trig's body? how is that an attack on trig? speculation that bristol is actually trig's mother? that rumor has about as much credence as the obama birth certificate story (someone from the MSM ask palin this: since she is so sensitive to rumors and accusations thrown at her that she claims are untrue, then does she feel obama would be justified in suing bloggers who claim he is not a natural born citizen?). what else? who has actually attacked her family? is it "attacking her family" to point out that bristol's advocacy of abstinence-only education is remarkably hypocritical? plus, doesn't bristol being an adult and taking on a public role in her new role as the spokesperson for the abstinence-only crowd, make her a legitimate target for people who oppose what she (allegedly) stands for? and, lest we forget, palin, more than any other politician that i can think of, thrust her family into the spotlight and made them a part of her campaign and public image. she relies on them as props and tools to further her own ambition, so is it not a complete double standard for her to rely on them to serve her needs yet claim them off limits for any commentary? look, the obama's are very protective of their daughters, and rightfully so. the palin children should be afforded the same luxury, and they have. NO ONE HAS EVER ATTACKED TRIG. OR WILLOW. OR TRAPP. OR WHATEVER OTHER WEIRD-ASS NAME HER OTHER KIDS HAVE (whoops, i just attacked her family!). the only palin child that has faced any sort of criticism is bristol, and that was of her own making.
i just don't get it. are pitbulls this thin skinned? are pitbulls this deranged that they think every form of criticism, legitimate or not, is part of some nefarious plot to destroy her family? are pitbulls quitters? i guess we know the answer now.
one refrain that i have constantly heard from her side is that she despises attacks against her family and that influenced her decision to step down. i can understand that, but seriously, can anyone actually point to an attack leveled at palin's family? sure, david letterman made an off-color joke about one of her kids, but i recall john mccain doing the same to a certain chelsea clinton. so, aside from that, who has been attacking palin's family? the blogger who photoshopped a different head on trig's body? how is that an attack on trig? speculation that bristol is actually trig's mother? that rumor has about as much credence as the obama birth certificate story (someone from the MSM ask palin this: since she is so sensitive to rumors and accusations thrown at her that she claims are untrue, then does she feel obama would be justified in suing bloggers who claim he is not a natural born citizen?). what else? who has actually attacked her family? is it "attacking her family" to point out that bristol's advocacy of abstinence-only education is remarkably hypocritical? plus, doesn't bristol being an adult and taking on a public role in her new role as the spokesperson for the abstinence-only crowd, make her a legitimate target for people who oppose what she (allegedly) stands for? and, lest we forget, palin, more than any other politician that i can think of, thrust her family into the spotlight and made them a part of her campaign and public image. she relies on them as props and tools to further her own ambition, so is it not a complete double standard for her to rely on them to serve her needs yet claim them off limits for any commentary? look, the obama's are very protective of their daughters, and rightfully so. the palin children should be afforded the same luxury, and they have. NO ONE HAS EVER ATTACKED TRIG. OR WILLOW. OR TRAPP. OR WHATEVER OTHER WEIRD-ASS NAME HER OTHER KIDS HAVE (whoops, i just attacked her family!). the only palin child that has faced any sort of criticism is bristol, and that was of her own making.
i just don't get it. are pitbulls this thin skinned? are pitbulls this deranged that they think every form of criticism, legitimate or not, is part of some nefarious plot to destroy her family? are pitbulls quitters? i guess we know the answer now.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Merry 4th of July
on this independence day lets take some time to think about all the peoples around the world still fighting for their independence.
i am especially thinking about the brave iranians who are standing up against their government to have their votes counted and voices heard.
where are all the ben franklins, thomas jeffersons, john adamses, and george washingtons today?
i am especially thinking about the brave iranians who are standing up against their government to have their votes counted and voices heard.
where are all the ben franklins, thomas jeffersons, john adamses, and george washingtons today?
Palin
i don't claim to be no political expert, but i think i have a pretty good understanding of how this politics thing works. despite being the astute observer of politics that i am, i was quite baffled by sarah palin's announcement yesterday that she is stepping down as governor of alaska to...well, its kind of unclear what her next step is. some are speculating that there is a major scandal on the way (could be true). others think she just isn't interested in the job of governor (could also be true). she might be retiring from politics (god i hope this is true, but unlikely). or she could be prepping for a presidential run (unsure if i want this to be true or not). and, as the dude on CNN just said, depending who you ask, this is either the smartest - or dumbest - political move ever. depending on who you ask.
here is my take. barring the scandal scenario, i think this could prove to be a shrewd move. allow me to explain. right now, the republican party is essentially leaderless. none of the republican senators or representatives really commands the national spotlight. there is no governor, save for palin, that really commands national attention either. the power base of the republican party right now is in the media with rush, beck, hannity, and the rest, but despite being popular and influential, none of them can really be considered the leader of the republican party, politically speaking.
this is where palin comes in. i think nominally she was the de facto leader of the party, but from alaska it is very difficult to really command the national spotlight. now freed of the encumbrance of being governor, palin is free to tour the country for the next 3 (!) years and act as a steady opposition to obama's policies. what form her opposition will take is unsure but i think this is what she is doing. she is attempting to position herself as the leader of the party, and as we all know, when it comes to republican presidential primaries, the front runner normally wins.
i wonder if it will pay off for her. i personally don't think its a sound strategy. she could have waited a year and announced that she isn't running for reelection. but this will give her the time to do her homework on domestic and foreign policy and if she devotes herself to full time campaigning for 3 (!) years, she could emerge as a much more polished (read: comprehensible) candidate.
time will tell.
here is my take. barring the scandal scenario, i think this could prove to be a shrewd move. allow me to explain. right now, the republican party is essentially leaderless. none of the republican senators or representatives really commands the national spotlight. there is no governor, save for palin, that really commands national attention either. the power base of the republican party right now is in the media with rush, beck, hannity, and the rest, but despite being popular and influential, none of them can really be considered the leader of the republican party, politically speaking.
this is where palin comes in. i think nominally she was the de facto leader of the party, but from alaska it is very difficult to really command the national spotlight. now freed of the encumbrance of being governor, palin is free to tour the country for the next 3 (!) years and act as a steady opposition to obama's policies. what form her opposition will take is unsure but i think this is what she is doing. she is attempting to position herself as the leader of the party, and as we all know, when it comes to republican presidential primaries, the front runner normally wins.
i wonder if it will pay off for her. i personally don't think its a sound strategy. she could have waited a year and announced that she isn't running for reelection. but this will give her the time to do her homework on domestic and foreign policy and if she devotes herself to full time campaigning for 3 (!) years, she could emerge as a much more polished (read: comprehensible) candidate.
time will tell.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Big Shot Is The Only True Sixers Mascot (updated)
UPDATED: i originally posted this on 8/10/07 and had forgotten that the video of big shot was of him dancing to michael jackson.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)