Money for Nothing

You all knew I would post something about baseball and with the end of the season it seems a good time to reflect on the Yankee's situation.

It has not been fun being a Yankee fan the last few years. It's not about the results. I don't expect them to win the World Series every year or even be in the World Series every year. For most baseball fans and for most teams the Yankees recent results would be more than satisfactory. They have been in the playoffs every year since 1996 and they have won 10 division championships, 6 AL pennants and 4 World Series. In addition the team is exciting to watch. Attending a game at Yankee stadium recalls the atmosphere at a rock concert.

We have also had some continuity - what my friend Barry calls "real Yankees" - players so familiar we only need to use their first names; e.g Bernie, Derek, Andy, Mariano and Jorge.

So what's the complaint?

It's hard to have fun routing for a team that is stupid.

The Yankees have more resources and spend way more than anyone else. I don't have the exact numbers (maybe Dave will do the research) but I estimate that they spend $40 million more than the #2 the Red Sox. That's an enormous advantage. Ir is equivalent to replacing Jeter and A-Rod with minor leaguers. Their advantage over the other teams such as the Indians, Tigers, Angels, Marlins, D-Backs is even more striking. In some case, the Yankee spending advantage was over $100 million. BTW - those are the other teams the Yankees have lost in the post-season this decade.

To me with an advantage that large the team should be odds-on favorites every year to win the World Series. They may not win every year but if the lose it would be considered an upset. That's not what we are getting. The 2007 and 2004 Red Sox, 2007 Indians, 2006 Tigers, 2005 Angels have been as good as the Yankees. And it is clear now that the Red Sox are better. They were favored to win this year and they avoided their former habit as a team that folds in the second-half.

So my peeve is that the Yankees throw away this advantage because they make stupid decisions. We have to hold Cashman responsible. He's the problem not Torre. I have played in a Rotiss league for about 20 years. In this league each team has equal resources and you gain advantage by using your resources effectively. Csshman and the Yankees throw away their enormous advantage by consistently overpaying for players. The most typical examples are paying for players past their prime, e.g. John Damon, Mike Mussina, Bobby Abreu, Randy Johnson, Matsui, etc. This clogs the roster with untradeable players if their performance slips as can be expected. This is compounded by the inability to evaluate talent. The moves that Cashman made before the 2005 season may represent the worse off-season by any GM in memory. That was the year Cashman brought in Pavano, Wright, Tino Martinez and Tony Womack. Money for Nothing.

And nothing is being learned. The Clemens deal proved Cashman is hapless. It was evident that if they were lucky they would get a mid-level starter who was a 6-inning pitcher and who had a huge downside due to injury risk.

Last year the Yankees added the useless-Igawa while the Red Sox acquired Dice-K and Okajima. And that is symbolic of the main worry. The Red Sox will also spend but they may have a clue. They had the Rookie of the Year, the best Rookie starting pitcher and the best Rookie setup man. They are better than the Yankees and they are younger.

My only conciliation is that I don't have the YES network.

Pity the Poor Immigrant

It disappoints me that the debate over immigration lacks some fundamental aspects.

1) Facts seems to me to be missing.

Some of the economic data surrounding the impacts of illegal immigration will be incomplete and some will be based on estimates. Estimates could easily be subjective - economic models are complex. I find it difficult to understand any estimate unless the study tells me specifically the assumptions included in the study.

But can we agree on this?
- Illegal immigrants provide cheap labor.
- Consumers and Employers of the good and services produced by cheap labor are both potential beneficiaries. If the illegal immigrant labor was supplied by US citizens and/or legal immigrants the costs of the labor would rise since the supply of labor would be reduced. But it is not clear to me how much the consumer benefits and how much the employer benefits.
- This supply of cheap labor dampens the salaries of legal workers especially low-skilled workers who compete with illegals.

So there is an impact on labor rates, costs of goods and services and probably unemployment. But who benefits and who does it hurt? How much of the cost savings are passed on to the consumer? For low-skilled workers does the cost savings compensate for lower wages?

The other economic impacts are really difficult to estimate. How much public money is spent providing services to illegals for education, health care, etc.? How much money is lost due to crime or uncollected taxes? How much is paid in taxes by illegals who end up with no legal claim to the public services paid by those taxes? I have no idea but shouldn't this be an integral part of the debate?

2) Assumptions are not verified.

We can't deport 12 million people. We hear this all of the time. Is that true?

If we had a policy of finding and deporting all illegal immigrants how would we do it? Some steps could be that for anyone who gets a parking or traffic ticket they must present a valid driver's license. If one can't be produced than there is a second charge and the person must provide some identification.

Likewise anyone charged with a crime must provide some identification.

If the person cannot provide identification that are held in jail without bail (due to flight risk). If the person is convicted and still has no identification they are deported and anything property they own is confiscated. Their employer is also notified and may be subject to an investigation about hiring illegals. Remember that hiring illegals is also against the law.

Wouldn't measures like this have the impact of (a) reducing the stream of illegals and (b) convincing some to go home? I am sure that there are any number of measures that would change the risk-reward profile for employers and workers.

Now I am not arguing for any specific measures but I am questioning the assumption that we cannot deport illegals. This would do more to stem illegal immigration than a fence. As T. always tells me, you need to deal with the problem on the demand side and the supply side.

3) Desired outcomes are not expressed.

On each side of the debate, what is the desired outcome or end state? Shouldn't an immigration policy be based on goals about population growth, goals on the composition of annual immigration based on skills, education, age, and nationality? The issue of fairness and nationality is central to the debate. Should we favor Mexicans and our brothers from Latin America over Asians, Europeans and Africans?

If there are resources that deal with the debate in a realistic way - let me know - since I am still undecided about a "comprehensive" immigration bill.

Forever Young

K and I went to see Steve Forbert in concert in downtown Hendersonville. Back in the day Steve Forbert was part of the "next Bob Dylan" conversation. Which really meant the "Voice of the Next Generation". Also in the conversation were John Prine, Loudon Wainwright, and yikes Joni Mitchell and Leonard Cohen.

We now know that Dylan was not the voice of a generation but just a singer/songwriter looking for Essence. We also know now that Leonard Cohen is a poet and Joni Mitchell a mystic. Performers like Steve Forbert moved in the penumbra, still visible behind the shadow of their early hope and promise.

Back to the present, he sang a song called Middle Age and one of the keeper ideas in the song was that we will never be younger again than we are right now.

So right now we have more experience than we have had before.

So right now we will never again be as young as we are this moment.

So right now we are all at the best point in our lives - balancing youth and experience. And, as we move through the vector of time this will remain true.