Triple option trading 61920s


In a way the Yankees got lucky there. The circumstances happened to line up. They needed a right-handed fourth outfielder, since two of their three starters were lefties and the other was a switch-hitter.

A left-handed infielder came in handy, too, because most of his work came spelling the right-handed Alex Rodriguez and the switch-hitting Mark Teixeira.

It was mere chance that a solid-hitting right-handed outfielder, Andruw Jones, and a reclamation project infielder, Eric Chavez, happen to be not only available, but willing to take on a reduced role.

For the most part, the bench moves worked out. After struggling in the first half, Jones came back with a huge second half performance. Considering the playing time available and the playing time they actually got, Jones and Chavez were two of the better bench players in the entire league last year.

Some bench players turn into starters when the player they back up gets hurt. Some players begin the season as a starter only to lose the job. There are also mid-season call-ups who are actually starters, but end up with a number of plate appearances similar to a bench player. Keeping the above caveats in mind, Chavez fared very well compared to other infielders who got between and plate appearances in Using the same parameters for outfielders, Jones fares even better.

Ayn Rand would likely be deeply unhappy with the state of American capitalism today. Not just because of an overweening state, large budget deficits, and interventions in the economy such as Obamacare—the issues that so excite her disciples in the Republican Party today—but also because of the morphing of the U. Rand would have seen the growing reliance of businesses on Washington for corporate welfare, and of politicians on businesses for campaign contributions, as an unhealthy codependency that distorts the free market she so admired.

The profits of firms in more than 40 percent of the U. Various studies show enormous returns on investments in lobbying—for example, the pharmaceutical industry reaps a return of 77, percent on lobbying versus 8 percent from actually making drugs. While Rand would have had many differences with the Occupy Wall Street protesters, she would have found common cause with their objections to the power of the K Street lobbyist-industrial complex.

Rentier capitalism is a system in which the focus is not on creating, making, investing, and building, but on distorting, protecting, skimming, and getting a slice. Democrats and Republicans alike dole out spending, preferential treatment, and regulatory gifts to favored industries and constituents, all oiled by ever-looser campaign finance rules. This creates space for horse-trading—a defense contract for my district in exchange for support of your regulatory break for financial services.

Such horse-trading cuts by interest group rather than along party lines. Fortunately, however, objections to the growing distortions in American capitalism are also increasingly bipartisan. But perhaps the most extensive argument against rentier capitalism has come from the right.

There is much in his agenda for both the center-right and center-left to agree on. Standing to the side is a lean and hungry-looking man holding out an empty plate. The facts about the decline of the American middle class are increasingly familiar, though startling nonetheless. Middle-class incomes today are no higher in real terms than they were in Much of the debt that caused the crisis was accumulated by the middle class as people tried to compensate for stagnant incomes by mortgaging up their homes and running up their credit cards.

For the typical middle-class family, the crisis wiped out 18 years of savings and investment. With too much debt before the crisis and their modest savings hammered by the downturn, many middle-class baby boomers are facing a major decline in living standards as they age. On the other side of the generational divide, this will be the first cohort in modern American history whose children will quite possibly be poorer than their parents.

It is too simple to say that one directly caused the other. But they are more tightly linked than might be expected. The usual explanations for the woes of the American middle class point to big tectonic forces—namely globalization and technological change. At a superficial level this argument is correct—competition from low-wage countries has depressed wage growth in certain sectors, and technology has eliminated some manufacturing and middle-management jobs.

One of the great historical strengths of both American capitalism and the American political system has been their adaptability. In the depths of the Depression, another Roosevelt responded with rural electrification, the creation of Social Security, and financial regulation that kept the system stable for 70 years.

The benefits of these innovations and investments flowed broadly in American society, not least to the middle class. While government spending has risen relentlessly over the past decades, what we have not been spending on is our future. Flying from run-down John F. One should not see this short-termism as only a problem of government. The private sector has also lost much of its ability to think and invest for the long term.

Starting in the s, elite business schools began teaching future managers and investors that the only metric that matters is shareholder value. This was a dramatic change, as throughout most of its history American capitalism had operated on a stakeholder model in which managers sought to balance the interests of multiple stakeholders, including investors, customers, employees, and local communities. The shareholder-value revolution created a short-term quarterly earnings culture, a bias toward sweating assets versus building them, a view that employees are a cost to be managed rather than human capital to be invested in, and a love of debt.

It also made CEOs and their top managers immensely rich by showering them with stock options. Some might reply, what about Apple, Google, and Facebook?