Guy Berger

In other words, create a whole different game than baseball? Or at least, an extremely different version of it? I was being facetious. But my point stands -- if we are going to get extremely exercised about the health risks faced by professional baseball players, then there are plenty of things that could be changed in the sport that will have a far more significant impact on this "problem" than cracking down on steroids. More seriously, we have video footage of the sport going back to 19xx -- we can establish that as the upper bound on acceptable physical exertion for baseball players and enforce it as necessary. That wouldn't create a "whole different game" and would reassure those in this thread who are agitated about the health risks faced by professional baseball players. Once we have taken those steps we could consider reducing less significant health risks like those caused by steroids. I'd still be glad to see any concrete medical evidence (published in top journals) that establishes the health consequences from using steroids. Guy

Jim, happy birthday. May you keep enlightening us for centuries to come. Guy

No, that I am completely indifferent about. I am just glad about the results. Guy So you are grateful for baseball played by juiced up athletes yet completely indifferent should they suffer adverse medical consequences in the future. My understanding is that the "adverse medical consequences" are minor. In terms of current human tragedies, this probably ranks at #1,.......,000,....000,005. From the Mitchell Report: I agree, these are decidedly minor medical consequences. Everyone would enjoy sporting events so much more if we'd just let the athletes use whatever supplement modern science can produce. What are the probabilities of any of those things happening as a direct result of using steroids? The statement you quote is meaningless without some actual numbers. Obviously there is a proven medical link between the two. And you should well know that coming up with precise numbers is problematic because it would require an unethical use of steroids. If there is an "proven medical link", then there should be some concrete evidence from medical studies, as part of a controlled experiment and/or a rigorous statistical study. That's how "medical proof" works. We certainly have comparable information on the effects of substances that are far more dubious legally than steroids. You can't seriously assert that this has anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. Injuries occur to anyone from the "weekend warrior" to the professional athlete. They have nothing to do with the proven deleterious medical effects of steroid use/abuse. Oh, I can totally assert it. The probability of injury would go down dramatically for most professional baseball players if they reduced the number of hours they have to play. The game is more physically taxing than it was in the days of Babe Ruth, so it is extremely likely that if we restricted players' exertion we would reduce baseball-related injuries. If we cut the number of games per season to 20 (with a week layoff, like football), limited players to one inning per game, illegalized pitches over 50 mphs or constrained field movement to brisk walking, we would surely improve the health of pro players by far more than the banning of steroids could ever hope to achieve. Guy

You're glad people pumped their bodies full of steroids and whatever else, to gain artificial advantages over honest players? No, that I am completely indifferent about. I am just glad about the results. Guy So you are grateful for baseball played by juiced up athletes yet completely indifferent should they suffer adverse medical consequences in the future. My understanding is that the "adverse medical consequences" are minor. In terms of current human tragedies, this probably ranks at #1,.......,000,....000,005. From the Mitchell Report: I agree, these are decidedly minor medical consequences. Everyone would enjoy sporting events so much more if we'd just let the athletes use whatever supplement modern science can produce. What are the probabilities of any of those things happening as a direct result of using steroids? The statement you quote is meaningless without some actual numbers. Athletes routinely place themselves at risk for injury as part of their line of work, and I am guessing that those risks are substantially higher than those of using steroid usage.

You're glad people pumped their bodies full of steroids and whatever else, to gain artificial advantages over honest players? No, that I am completely indifferent about. I am just glad about the results. Guy So you are grateful for baseball played by juiced up athletes yet completely indifferent should they suffer adverse medical consequences in the future. My understanding is that the "adverse medical consequences" are minor. In terms of current human tragedies, this probably ranks at #1,.......,000,....000,005.

You're glad people pumped their bodies full of steroids and whatever else, to gain artificial advantages over honest players? No, that I am completely indifferent about. I am just glad about the results. Guy

I agree 100%. That's the nature of asset bubbles... even perfectly rational people who know that asset prices are completely unhinged have an incentive to buy in (as long as you aren't the one left holding the hot potato), and it's extremely risky to bet on the bubble popping. Let's be honest -- Goldman got extremely lucky. If the bubble had kept going sufficiently longer they could have lost a ton of money on these positions, as Bear Stearns did. Let me be clear when I say "people" I mean it loosely to include all financial market participants. Everybody wants that magic asset that gives high yield with minimal risk (the modern equivalent of the money tree) and during bubbles they are willing to pretend that the risk simply doesn't exist. Guy

MG, The basic punchline is that central banks are worried that the current credit crunch is (A) going to generate widespread chaos in the financial system and (B) going to generate spillovers into the rest of the economy in the form of tighter lending. (In other words, the crunch is causing a large effective tightening of monetary policy even though policy rates have not gone up.) The belief is that traditional monetary policy tools (raising and lowering interest rates) are not as effective as they were in the past and that more targeted policy is needed. We will see. The coordinated announcement itself is sort of a "sunspot", the actions are operationally independent except for the currency swap. Guy

I think it's a question worth asking, though I'm inclined to think that there isn't a conspiracy there. Most organizations of this type have Chinese Walls theoretically separating these functions, so the guys packaging CDOs and other structured finance products are supposedly kept at arms' length from the trading desk (who in this case were shorting the ABX). In reality, we are talking about human beings and these people talk. Information inevitably flows from one end to the other. You also have the top management, who must know what is going on in both places. That said, I'm inclined to think the conspiracy theory that Goldman was intentionally manufacturing crap SF products so they could effectively short them is implausible for several reasons. (A) they are now stuck with a bunch of them on their books and (B) as far as I know, there were enough players in this market that Goldman's ability to move the market through their own structured finance offerings was somewhat limited. So why was Goldman (and other financial institutions) manufacturing crap SF products? The sad truth is... they were giving the "people" what they want. A few other points -- I know at this point I am echoing the "Communism didn't fail, its misapplication did" line, but I think it's fundamentally true -- subprime mortgages and securitization of assets are both great ideas which generate economic gains, and they worked until 2004 or 2005. The problem is that the incentives in the system led to things going very wrong after that, and that's the mess we will have to deal with for the next few years. Second point -- not sure if you guys remember, but the first real inkling of problems in subprime mortgages leaking into financial markets were in June, when the two Bear Stearns hedge funds collapsed. Like Goldman, these BS were also shorting the ABX. Unfortunately for them the margin calls came a little too early. If they could have held out a little longer they would have made boatloads of money and maybe we'd be talking about BS's genius traders instead of GS's.

Never heard that about him. But if he was, that would kind of make him not boring, wouldn't it? He was a very tough Chief Secretary to the Treasury (the job is to cut spending plans down to size) in the early days of the Labour Government. MG I actually got him mixed up with Alastair Campbell. When the Northern Rock debacle started I read AD's wikipedia biography, he apparently won the "most boring politician" in several polls. Also "Darling's Darlings" and the cat named after Sybil Fawlty. Guy

Well, I am glad they did it. It probably made baseball more exciting the last decade or two. Guy

The UK's most boring politician, IIRC. I was surprised to discover (at the beginning of the NR crisis) that he was Brown's Chancellor, I had always assumed he was a Blairite. Wasn't he involved in the sexing up of the Iraq dossier? Guy

This story, which has been in a few of the national newspapers but probably hasn't made much impact outside of Florida (or has it? I don't watch cable news), is absolutely staggering.

The NY Fed just published a preliminary study on the effect of payday lending bans in GA and NC. The authors claim they found that these bans had negative effect on borrowers. In addition, the doubling of the loan size limit at Hawaiian payday lenders supposedly had a positive effect on borrowers. However, I have not given the econometrics or the welfare metrics they use enough thought to judge whether their conclusions are sound. Here is the paper's introduction:

Not strictly true (I am really just picking nits***) -- the revolt itself was successful in chasing the Syrian Greeks out (with occasional setbacks) and creating a Jewish kingdom in Judea. However, about a century later the rulers of that kingdom (descended from the Macabees) fell into bickering and when Pompey the Great brought Roman legions into the Levant he "settled the dispute" by sucking Judea into the Roman orbit. Guy ***I am sure Larry's parenthetical comment was just intended as a summary of my paragraph.

If by "fascinating" you mean it royally pisses you off, I agree. Well, I am wearing my "social scientist" hat. Plus I am lucky enough not to be living in a country stupid enough to put price controls on food. As far as the outlook for Africa -- not very good, though South Africa and other food exporters will be big beneficiaries in the aggregate and wise policies (a big if) could spread that benefit around. Guy

It's a little chilly today at 68 degrees but it looks like we will be in the mid 70s for the beginning of next week. I love winter! Guy

Extremely interesting article. I figure that in 30-50 years we will see this as a temporary deviation from trend, but for the short and medium term higher food prices are probably here to stay. I also find the implementation of inferior policies like ethanol subsidies and price controls to be fascinating.

I have to say that getting rid of the politics forum strikes me as a bad idea. It's a steam valve (or perhaps "sewer" is a better word) for the rest of the board -- all the really heated controversial stuff goes there so we don't have to read it in the other subforums. Eliminate it, and it will pop up elsewhere on the board. Cesspits serve a purpose. Guy

Wow. I know I haven't been as active on the board in the past 4 months as I was in the previous 4 years, but one of the things I look forward to when coming home from work is reading what all of you have to say. It's a great community and I've learned a ton. You guys are awesome! Jim, I really hope you reconsider. But even if you don't, you deserve our deepest gratitude for keeping this thing running for as long as you can. All the fun we've had is a testament to your dedication and patience. Guy

Thanks fellas. I am watching my Chanukkiah lit as I write this. Guy