Cuba and the US

[Olerud363]

Your using the term freedom like it has some objective meaning. Capitalists, libertarians or neoliberalism which essentially combines the two love spouting the word freedom while not having any idea what the hell it means. Nobody does anymore really, its been used in so many different contexts and has implied so many different things its simply a meaningless term. Ask the majority of people in Haiti, D.R, Belize, Mexico, Honduras and any other country within that surrounding area and they would willingly jump at the opportunity to live under this "oppressive system" with a lack of "financial freedom".

 

U.N. Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International, and the Red Cross all rated Cuba's justice system as normal, i.e. no better or worse than ours. Anybody who has traveled to Cuba can attest to the fact that there are essentially no slums in Cuba, and that MOST of the people in Latin America not living in Cuba who are supposedly blessed with "freedom" are miserably uncomfortable and live sad, desperate lives. Each citizen is guaranteed a meal at school or on the job and all house/ institutionalized apartment annual payments cost approximately 10% of a persons salary which is equivalent to about $100,000 in most major cities.

 

So I suppose according to you I am one of these socialists that "love Castro". But in reality I just think its inexcusable the lifestyles the majority of people have and its commendable the lifestyles that Castro has been able to give to Cubans especially considering their history and where they started from.

 

Freedom "the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint."

 

I have a business idea that I want to develop. It will make me 4 million dollars in one year. I then want to spend the rest of my life developing some ideas on cancer research that I have.

 

I like money. I want to make a lot of money. I have the skills to do so.

 

I live an extremely frugal life. I can make by working for 10 hours a week. I have a high quality of life mostly reading and thinking. I do not believe in Western medicine and do not want benefits. I have a small business owner that is willing to pay me a small wage and in return he will let me live the simple life I want.

 

Under a socialist system I cannot do these things.

 

To guarantee people a job and a house means you have to take away other freedoms.

 

There is no Utopia. In order to have your vision you have to take away my right to run a small contracting business the way I want. For the greater good... but not for my good. And then I wonder if it is arrogant of you to force your vision of "greater good" on the rest of us.

[KingKat]

Can this whole thread be moved to the off topic forum by a mod? It's clearly not a baseball discussion.

[Olerud363]

Can this whole thread be moved to the off topic forum by a mod? It's clearly not a baseball discussion.

 

I personally dislike it when threads like this are moved. I believe in the "invisible hand" theory of threads. Threads that are meaningful will stay near the top. It is off topic... but I don't see anything wrong with an occasional off topic thread... I'm not sure how many people check the off topic forum.

 

However I believe in ownership as well. By contributing as admins a certain group has a degree of ownership over this forum. It is their right to do whatever they see fit to threads. If I don't like it tough luck. I didn't build this place.

[immature]

Under a socialist system you cannot make 4 million a year, and you cannot run a contracting business the way you see fit. I agree with these statements and also agree that under your definition, through this socialist system I will be restricting some of your freedoms. The important question is under a socialist system what freedom is gained, is the overall standard of living improved, is the mental well being of the society improved? And really that's the only question.

 

This vision of a greater good should not be under quotations nor considered dubious or subjective. Today, with the amount of productivity that technology has enabled, everyone should be guaranteed food, clothing, shelter. The amount of labor that it would take to do these things would probably be around 10% of the population. Add another 15-20% for education, healthcare, transportation and management and you essentially have 70% of the workforce idle. Cut the hours of everybody in the workforce and you essentially have the lifestyle you stated previously without necessarily being frugal. "I can make by working for 10 hours a week. I have a high quality of life mostly reading and thinking."

 

The past 50 years has seen technology and productivity improve at alarming rights yet the socioeconomic system remain essentially the same...

 

Am i insane and think this will occur..no, but its still right.

[LongTimeReader]

I personally dislike it when threads like this are moved. I believe in the "invisible hand" theory of threads. Threads that are meaningful will stay near the top. It is off topic... but I don't see anything wrong with an occasional off topic thread... I'm not sure how many people check the off topic forum.

 

However I believe in ownership as well. By contributing as admins a certain group has a degree of ownership over this forum. It is their right to do whatever they see fit to threads. If I don't like it tough luck. I didn't build this place.

 

I've never visited off-topic threads and look at my alias.

[KingKat]

I've never visited off-topic threads and look at my alias.

 

Well you should still have to go there to have off-topic discussions. It seems silly not to check both but if that's how people operate, I suppose the Off-Topic forum could be merged and the threads identified through labelling (I'm not in favour of this btw). In any case, it doesn't make sent to have the off-topic threads here when an off-topic forum exists.

[LongTimeReader]

Well you should still have to go there to have off-topic discussions. It seems silly not to check both but if that's how people operate, I suppose the Off-Topic forum could be merged and the threads identified through labelling (I'm not in favour of this btw). In any case, it doesn't make sent to have the off-topic threads here when an off-topic forum exists.

 

I live, breathe, and will die baseball... I actually get a little mad when people are not talking about baseball-related things here

[JaysRap]

Well you should still have to go there to have off-topic discussions. It seems silly not to check both but if that's how people operate, I suppose the Off-Topic forum could be merged and the threads identified through labelling (I'm not in favour of this btw). In any case, it doesn't make sent to have the off-topic threads here when an off-topic forum exists.

 

What started as a baseball discussion quickly derailed into political discussion - which is fine, just not a baseball discussion as KingKat points out. Thread should be moved so those who want to continue can, and maybe the next Cuban players thread sticks to the baseball aspects and effects on major league rosters.

[Olerud363]

Under a socialist system you cannot make 4 million a year, and you cannot run a contracting business the way you see fit. I agree with these statements and also agree that under your definition, through this socialist system I will be restricting some of your freedoms. The important question is under a socialist system what freedom is gained, is the overall standard of living improved, is the mental well being of the society improved? And really that's the only question.

 

 

Am i insane and think this will occur..no, but its still right.

 

You have to bully somebody to make it happen... to some the equation doesn't work out. You need central control to make decisions. Who cleans the toilet?? Who gets to invent iphones?? Who gets to be idle?? Who gets to be a Doctor??

 

Perhaps man is not made to live in such a state being dominated by others... even if he suffers more he may be happier struggling with the rat race and dreaming of the day he makes it big... I know I am.

 

This is a deep philosiphical question that much greater minds have debated (like Sean Hannity and Allen Combes).

[Captain Adama]

You have to bully somebody to make it happen... to some the equation doesn't work out. You need central control to make decisions. Who cleans the toilet?? Who gets to invent iphones?? Who gets to be idle?? Who gets to be a Doctor??

 

Perhaps man is not made to live in such a state being dominated by others... even if he suffers more he may be happier struggling with the rat race and dreaming of the day he makes it big... I know I am.

 

This is a deep philosiphical question that much greater minds have debated (like Sean Hannity and Allen Combes).

 

If you're joking, this is a great troll post. If not, well may x deity have mercy on your soul

[GreekFatAss]

Socialism will always fail because Humans are unable to collectively put the goodwill of the society above their own desires. The root idea in socialism is envy, the group as a whole will always envy that which others have, the problem is you can only expropriate material things where as other stuff like beauty, intelligence and athletic ability can not be taken away and still cause a point of envy among those who do not have it.

 

Humans are also lazy animals and we try our best to do things as easily possible and why we continue to improve on things we already can do to make them even easier (this is not a flaw). The problem with that is, if you give 100 people the choice to sit on their ass and do nothing while getting an equal share of the reward or work their ass off to feed and provide for the ones who won’t work you will likely see a 9:1 ratio of people who will do nothing which is what causes the system to fail.

[Olerud363]

If you're joking, this is a great troll post. If not, well may x deity have mercy on your soul

 

It wasn't suppose to be a troll post... it was sort of semi toungue in cheek.

 

I enjoyed watching Hannity spar with Colmes and was sad when they kicked Colmes off the show.... I enjoy listening to Rush on the afternoon drive.

 

I read a website called common dreams.org which is about as left as you can get, I also love the drudge report's great headlines... especially during the Ebola crisis.

 

I have read all the books by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. I like Bill James. I guess I take those two more seriously then Hannity... but I say who am I to judge?? I'm only here to listen.

[Olerud363]

Socialism will always fail because Humans are unable to collectively put the goodwill of the society above their own desires. The root idea in socialism is envy, the group as a whole will always envy that which others have, the problem is you can only expropriate material things where as other stuff like beauty, intelligence and athletic ability can not be taken away and still cause a point of envy among those who do not have it.

 

 

And the problem is that for the ones who have on odd skill that is unrecognizable by the "authorities" that person loses... some dude is a great cook... he relies on an authority to recognize his skill and make him a cook, rather than working his ass off and making himself a cook.

 

Or three guys are a seriously great cook, an ok cook, and a mediocre cook... they all get the same reward. But beyond that who gets to be fed by the seriously great cook?? How do we decide that??

[flafson]

Alan Colmes is not much of a great mind, more like a mind at best.

[immature]

Perhaps man is not made to live in such a state being dominated by others...

Socialism will always fail because Humans are unable to collectively put the goodwill of the society above their own desires.

 

This argument will never find a conclusion because it is based on both sides of psychological conjecture as stated above. But a pure socialist state boarding on "communist" "resource based economy" or whatever collective term is in vogue is certainty worth a try, especially in a developed country. Because the fact is, its never truly been tried before so whose to say it would fail. The country that all the bigwigs like to reference is the Soviet Union, however they were hijacked by a brutal dictator, lost billions in the arms race and foreign wars and morphed into something very different than what most socialists would view as an ideal society. And the developed states (because it would be unfair to compare Cuba's standard of living to Canada's for instance when Cuba is 10 steps behind in terms of development when it became socialist) that have become to resemble highly socialist states like Finland and Denmark are known for their high standard of living (OECD better life index).

 

If you surveyed the entire population and said would you rather live in a socialist state where you are guaranteed food, shelter, clothing, and have to work 30 hours a week, but you also will be unable to buy a mansion become extremely wealthy and will get the same salary and benefits as someone who cleans toilets. I bet all the people who clean toilets and work minimum wage jobs take it, and it would probably be around a 50-50 split for all those who don't. So that's pretty much 75%, a substantial majority.

[Olerud363]

Perhaps man is not made to live in such a state being dominated by others...

Socialism will always fail because Humans are unable to collectively put the goodwill of the society above their own desires.

 

This argument will never find a conclusion because it is based on both sides of psychological conjecture as stated above. But a pure socialist state boarding on "communist" "resource based economy" or whatever collective term is in vogue is certainty worth a try, especially in a developed country. Because the fact is, its never truly been tried before so whose to say it would fail. The country that all the bigwigs like to reference is the Soviet Union, however they were hijacked by a brutal dictator, lost billions in the arms race and foreign wars and morphed into something very different than what most socialists would view as an ideal society. And the developed states (because it would be unfair to compare Cuba's standard of living to Canada's for instance when Cuba is 10 steps behind in terms of development when it became socialist) that have become to resemble highly socialist states like Finland and Denmark are known for their high standard of living (OECD better life index).

 

If you surveyed the entire population and said would you rather live in a socialist state where you are guaranteed food, shelter, clothing, and have to work 30 hours a week, but you also will be unable to buy a mansion become extremely wealthy and will get the same salary and benefits as someone who cleans toilets. I bet all the people who clean toilets and work minimum wage jobs take it, and it would probably be around a 50-50 split for all those who don't. So that's pretty much 75%, a substantial majority.

 

I live in the United States of America.

 

My friend who earns 100,000 k a year with awesome benefits is a socialist. He hates Obama because he is way to the left of Obama. It is his view that 80,000 a year is the minimum salary required to live and everyone should get that (just about what he gets, he is willing to go down 20,000 but no more). Everyone should earn 80,000 and their are no millionaires.

 

My friend who works 60 hours a week at various jobs and has 8 kids is conservative and really liked Mitt Romney. He earns maybe 50,000. But only because he works 60 hours a week. He loves his life. He hardly sleeps and does everything for his kids. He is extremely afraid of socialism. When you talk about socialism he is always like "get that out of my house, work an hour, earn a dollar, that's the way we do it here."

 

That is somewhat typical of America. 75% would not vote for socialism. Recent elections show that. People are voting for Crony-Coorprotists because of their ultimate hate of socialism.

 

Typical American "I'd rather be dominated by Goldman Sachs and Walmart and Pepsi Co. then the government. I will let those coorporations screw me, but the government cannot."

 

The only solution is to return to individualism and step away from Demo-Repub coorporatism, and socialism.

 

We need a new movement that centers around the individual and their rights.

[Olerud363]

Alan Colmes is not much of a great mind, more like a mind at best.

 

It's been 10 years I think since Colmes got a regular gig... so I can't even really remember what his views were... just that he was suppose to argue with Hannity. Guess he didn't do a good job??

 

Or maybe he did and that's why they kicked him off the show and let it go 100% "let freedom ring"

[flafson]

It's been 10 years I think since Colmes got a regular gig... so I can't even really remember what his views were... just that he was suppose to argue with Hannity. Guess he didn't do a good job??

 

Or maybe he did and that's why they kicked him off the show and let it go 100% "let freedom ring"

 

His views are almost out of this world, even for a liberal. It's almost as bad as Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Juan Williams is nice if you're looking for a great mind, i don't agree with him but i definitely respect him.

[Olerud363]

His views are almost out of this world, even for a liberal. It's almost as bad as Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Juan Williams is nice if you're looking for a great mind, i don't agree with him but i definitely respect him.

 

Neither Schultz or Colmes are really in the limelight these days. Even Juan Williams I don't hear much of.

 

I'm a casual cable news viewer. I come home at 8:30 or so and flip between O'Reilly and MSNBC hoping it will some how even out.

 

Used to catch a bit of Hannity... but they replaced him by the Fiesty chick who told off Karl Rove... she is still pretty right wing but atleast had the self respect to tell of Rove once.

[Olerud363]

His views are almost out of this world, even for a liberal. It's almost as bad as Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Juan Williams is nice if you're looking for a great mind, i don't agree with him but i definitely respect him.

 

And Schultz is a congresswoman I think?? For a while she was always on the air. But I don't remember seeing her much this year??

 

I think the Democrats muzzled some of their farther left members... to try and salvage the election.

[TheHurl]

Hate to bump this thread but I thought I'd post this actual baseball related story from BA.

 

The next step toward an influx of Cuban players coming to Major League Baseball teams is underway. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama announced sweeping changes in the United States’ Cuban policies, easing trade and travel restrictions, announcing the opening of a U.S. embassy in Cuba and saying the countries will continue discussions to try to normalize their relationship.

 

For Cuban players to more freely come to MLB, the 54-year U.S. embargo against Cuba still needs to be lifted. That requires congressional approval, with Obama saying that he looks forward to “engaging Congress in an honest and serious debate about lifting the embargo.” Cuban president Raul Castro also spoke publicly Wednesday, urging the U.S. to disband the embargo.

 

To anyone following U.S.-Cuban politics and the direction of Cuban baseball, the trends in recent years have been clear. The MLB commissioner’s office has had internal discussions about what to do if the embargo was lifted and Cuba ever opened up. So have team personnel.

 

It’s not clear what’s next, although nothing is likely to happen for the 2015 season. Beyond that, however, major changes could be in store in terms of how MLB teams procure Cuban talent.

 

If the embargo is lifted, there could suddenly be hundreds of professional-caliber players available to teams. Some could be immediate all-stars, others have a chance to be steady, everyday players, others could be role players or bullpen arms, with a high volume of players capable of handling a minor league assignment, ranging from talented young prospects to players who would be organizational filler types. If it wasn’t obvious before, every MLB organization needs to have a full-time Cuban supervisor. Some of them already do, but many are still playing catch-up.

 

It’s highly unlikely, however, that there would be a sudden free-for-all on Cuban talent. MLB doesn’t want that. Neither does the Cuban government. Both sides would want to establish some order to what would be an extremely complicated process for all sides to navigate, one that certainly will involve mistakes along the way, not due to incompetence but just the sheer complexity of accounting for every detail and unintended consequence that will pop up.

 

The commissioner’s office will want control over a potentially chaotic situation, and to put the best Cuban players in MLB uniforms. From Cuba’s perspective, the Cuban government and Cuban baseball officials want to ensure two things:

 

1. That the Cuban league, Serie Nacional, remains up and running

2. That they make money for themselves in the process

 

Cuba, as Baseball America reported in September 2013, is already open to allowing its players to participate in other leagues. We have seen this system begin to play out in Cuba’s relationship with other foreign professional leagues, most notably Japan’s Nippon Professional Baseball. Last summer, the Cuban government brokered contracts for four players to spend the season with Japanese teams, then return home in the winter to play for Cuba during the Serie Nacional season, which now runs from September through April.

 

By essentially leasing some of its top stars to Japanese teams, the NPB clubs received stars such as third baseman Yulieski Gourriel and outfielder Alfredo Despaigne, talents far beyond what they typically receive for a good Triple-A import. The Cuban players get to make some money, while the Cuban government takes a cut of those deals for themselves, with the exact commission unconfirmed.

 

The Cuban government expected to be able to have a lucrative program doing the same thing through the Mexican League, but that idea was terminated when major league officials expressed concern about potential embargo violations and Despaigne was caught using what was obviously a fraudulent Dominican passport to play in the league.

 

Major league teams want the ability to scoop up as much talent as they can, but the commissioner’s office will want order to the process. Making every Cuban player suddenly a free agent would be a nightmare.

 

What’s most likely to happen—and what some prominent Cuban baseball officials are pushing for—is some type of system that’s a cross between the relationship MLB holds with the Mexican League and the posting system it has with Asian foreign professional leagues such as NPB and the Korea Baseball Organization. When teams sign Mexican players, they are usually targeting 16-year-olds (like Dodgers lefthander Julio Urias and Blue Jays righthander Roberto Osuna, among many others), the majority of whom are already affiliated with Mexican League teams. The teams train and develop those players, sell them to major league teams and take a 75 percent cut for themselves.

 

MLB already recognizes Serie Nacional as a foreign professional league. So what some Cuban baseball officials want is to become another version of the Mexican League, which could potentially include an associate affiliation with the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues (also known as Minor League Baseball), just like the Mexican League, or some other type of agreement with MLB.

 

Cuba could then sell players directly to MLB teams. Except instead of teams targeting 16-year-olds, they would be signing several ready-made big leaguers. So there could be a posting system, like MLB has with NPB and the KBO, where Cuba informs MLB that a player is ready to be made available to MLB teams, and the player could be signed through the posting system.

 

The NPB and KBO posting systems are different. In Japan, the team sets a “release fee” up to $20 million. Every MLB team is free to negotiate with the player and the team that signs the player is required to pay the release fee to the Japanese team. The KBO operates under the old Japanese posting system, where teams submit a posting bid, and if the KBO team accepts the highest bid, only the winning bidder is allowed to negotiate with the player.

 

Given that MLB would hold significant power in negotiations, something along the lines of the Japanese posting system seems more likely, although the Cuban government could potentially double dip if it’s negotiating the contract and getting a commission on the deal as well.

 

One complicating factor: the international bonus pools. Players who are at least 23 and have played five seasons in a foreign professional league, such as Serie Nacional, are exempt from the pools. That was the case with Red Sox outfielder Rusney Castillo and Diamondbacks outfielder Yasmany Tomas, as well as Yankees righthander Masahiro Tanaka when he came over from Japan through the posting system a year ago.

 

The younger players, though, are subject to the pools, which were designed with a focus on mostly Latin American amateur signings of players age 16-18. Some teams have already spent well beyond their 2014-15 bonus pools, which results in a tax on 100 percent of their pool overage and no signings for more than $300,000 the next two signing periods, without signing any Cuban players. That’s starting to change though, with the Angels breaking their pool to sign shortstop Roberto Baldoquin, while infielders Yoan Moncada and Andy Ibanez are certain to cause teams to exceed their pools to land them.

 

A sudden splash of pool-eligible players such as outfielder Victor Mesa, shortstop Lourdes Gourriel, righthander Vladimir Gutierrez and outfielder Jorge Ona would just create a larger mess. It would also take money away from the 16-year-old kids from the Dominican Republic, Venezuela and other countries, the ones for whom the pools were originally designated. Even without an end to the embargo, MLB’s international bonus pool system needs an overhaul, so the pools are an area the commissioner’s office will have to work through after the current Collective Bargaining Agreement expires on Dec. 1, 2016.

 

Future Of Baseball In Cuba

 

As for the Cuban league, Serie Nacional would still exist, but it would have to change. It’s already changed, anyway. Cuban baseball officials have recognized the intense drain of talent the league has suffered as a result of defections. The league has lost its top stars like Yoenis Cespedes and Jose Abreu, along with top up-and-coming talent like Yasiel Puig, Jorge Soler and Leonys Martin. Even beyond them, players who are no more than organizational types by MLB standards (many of whom never even end up signing) have left Cuba, where many were solid everyday players, some even all-stars in the league.

 

So two years ago, the league divided itself into two halves. The teams with the eight best records in the 16-team league during the first half continued to play in the second half. Those top eight teams supplemented their second-half rosters by drafting players from teams who were eliminated in the first half (those players return to their original clubs the next season). Even if nothing changed between the U.S. and Cuba, more changes were likely on the way, including talk of potentially consolidating the numbers of teams in the league. Perhaps Cuba could even open up the league to allow foreign players to participate.

 

One question that MLB and Cuban teams would have to sort through would be whether Cuban players who sign with MLB teams would still play in Cuba. The Cuban agreement with Japanese teams allows players like Gourriel, Despaigne and Frederich Cepeda to play for their NPB teams, then they go back to Cuba and play for their Serie Nacional clubs. Those players all took a breather and didn’t play at the beginning of the current 2014-15 Serie Nacional season, but they’re essentially playing year-round baseball, including stints on the Cuban national team. MLB teams won’t be as accommodating, especially with pitchers, who would be prone to overuse and abuse if they spent their MLB offseason pitching in Serie Nacional. Something would have to be worked out, maybe on a case-by-case basis, to try to satisfy all parties involved. One good thing is that, if a player’s career in the U.S. doesn’t work out and he gets released, he could potentially rejoin Serie Nacional full-time, something that obviously isn’t an option right now for players who have left Cuba.

 

The Cuban national team is also a great source of pride for the country. The shape of that team could change dramatically. Imagine a 2017 World Baseball Classic that has not just Gourriel and Despaigne, but also gets to use Abreu, Puig, Aroldis Chapman and other Cuban-born stars who currently can’t play for their native country. The WBC would be a relatively easy sell for most teams that aren’t paranoid, but many of the international tournaments Cuba takes seriously occur during the middle of the MLB season. Any player on a major league roster would almost certainly be out of the question for those events, although teams do let their prospects participate in them sometimes, so there could be flexibility there.

 

Bottom Line

 

The Cuban government is open to its players playing abroad, whether it’s NPB, the Mexican League or MLB. And MLB wants Cuban players to come over. Right now, that can’t happen, but the sense on both sides was that things were on the verge of changing, even before Obama’s announcement of proposed restructuring of the countries’ relationship.

 

There won’t be an immediate change in baseball because there are still laws to change and steps to work out, but the arrows are all pointing in the same direction. The most likely future will draw from MLB’s relationship with the Mexican League and the posting agreements in Asia. MLB teams would have access to the top Cuban talent. The Cuban league could continue to operate and would make money like Mexican and Japanese teams do by selling players to MLB teams. Cuban players would have more freedom to come to the United States, earn salaries from MLB teams and return home in the offseason.

 

There are no guarantees that will happen or what will come next, but the commissioner’s office has plenty of options and scenarios it must run through to come up with a solution for its future