Roy O pitched seven shutout innings and Adam Everett cranked two solo yaks as the Stros downed the Diamondbacks, 10-3 on Tuesday night at the Juice Box.
Oswalt was masterful as he struck out five while giving up only two hits and walk during his seven innings. The DBacks jumped on Kirk Bullinger for their three runs in the eighth, but Chad Harville finally pitched a decent inning in throwing a scoreless ninth.
The Stros’ hitters had extended batting practice against the DBacks’ Edgar Gonzalez and Steve Sparks as they pounded 12 hits, including Everetts’ two yaks, JK‘s two run shot, and Bags‘ three run tater. Morgan Ensberg chipped in with a couple of doubles as he continues his long road to a respectable OPS.
The Stros are looking good again tomorrow night as the Rocket takes the hill against ex-Texas Aggie Casey Fossum (6.17 ERA). Isn’t it nice getting the DBacks when Randy Johnson is not pitching?
Daily Archives: July 27, 2004
More on Houston’s light rail boondoggle
Following this earlier post on the economic absurdity of light rail systems, Randal O’Toole, one of the economists over at The Commons, cites the Houston light rail system as one example why cities such as Denver and Austin should reject such systems:
Houston opened a 7.5-mile light-rail line in its downtown on January 1. It has so far caused more than 50 collisions with autos or pedestrians (including a few during testing before January 1). While the transit agency blames bad auto drivers, the accident rate is twenty times the national average for light-rail lines.
Mr. O’Toole notes other economic disasters involving rail systems in other cities, and then aptly summarizes as follows:
The push for rail transit comes from construction companies that seek to soak the taxpayers building it, downtown property owners who hope to enhance the value of their properties, anti-auto environmentalists who view congestion with schadenfreude, and collectivists who think we would be better off in collective transit than private autos. None of these reasons are very appealing so they cloak their goals behind specious claims that rails will reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, something that rail transit has never done.
Amen.
Mike Tyson, Debtor-in-Possession
Former heavyweight champion boxer Mike Tyson is currently a debtor-in-possession in a chapter 11 bankruptcy case. This NY Times article outlines Tyson’s plan of reorganization, which is based on the income stream that Mr. Tyson supposedly will generate from fighting an unusually aggressive schedule on pay-for-view television:
The reorganization assumes that Tyson (50-4) will fight five times through November 2005 (with dispensation to stretch the fights out over two more years, when he’ll be 41), an extraordinary amount of work for a boxer who has not fought in 17 months and has not beaten a great opponent since Ronald Reagan was in his second term.
The reorganization requires that after keeping $2 million from each fight, Tyson must pay into a reorganization trust fund 50 percent of the after-tax proceeds from his bouts, or $19 million, to pay his taxes and his former wife Monica Turner.
Tyson’s first payment to the trust fund, $890,000, . . . is due next month. He must then pay the fund $4.9 million in each of the quarters ending Jan. 31 and April 30, 2005, followed by a payment of $3.7 million in the quarter ending October 31, 2005, and $4.6 million in the quarter ending January 31, 2006.
The plan does not state what will happen if he does not make the payments.
I can answer that one: Liquidation, which is where Tyson should probably be anyway.
It also turns out that Mr. Tyson has settled matters with his former promoter, Don King:
The best news for his finances is the $14 million that will come from the recent settlement of the $100 million federal lawsuit he filed in 1998 that alleged financial fraud against Don King, his former promoter.
King will pay Tyson $8 million soon after the reorganization plan goes into effect, $3 million plus interest in January 2005 and $3 million plus interest in January 2006.
For all the money that Tyson charged that King had siphoned off, he will get none of it; all of it will go for debts.
Meanwhile, those pesky chapter 11 operating reports provide some interesting information on Mr. Tyson’s current life:
According to the monthly financial reports Tyson files with the bankruptcy court, his personal earnings in February, $26.54, were overwhelmed by $67,960 in personal expenses. In March, his income improved to $15,127, while his expenses fell to $25,389. And in April, his income soared to $125,055 and his expenses rose again, to $62,589.
Mike Tyson is not a particularly good fighter anymore. Nevertheless, just as many people watch NASCAR events to see the crashes, many folks will tune into a Tyson fight in order to see the inevitable meltdown of Tyson in living color. About when you think the fight game has gone as low as it can go, people leeching off of Tyson push it even lower. Only in America.
The usual government solution
Count the Wall Street Journal’s ($) George Melloan as skeptical that the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation of a new cabinet department headed by a “National Intelligence Director” is a good idea:
The late William E. Simon, Treasury secretary in the Nixon and Ford administrations, once described to a small group of Journal editors the origin of what would later become the U.S. Department of Energy.
As deputy to Treasury Secretary George Shultz in 1973, he had been sitting in for his boss at a Nixon cabinet meeting and offered a report on the energy “crisis.” Mr. Nixon chewed on his pencil for a moment and then, inspired by a thought, told Mr. Simon that he was putting him in charge of a White House energy policy office, a job that later earned him the title of “energy czar.” In 1977, Congress and Jimmy Carter created a full-blown cabinet-level department to try to deal with the still-unsolved “energy crisis.” Today, the DOE has wide-ranging powers and a budget of roughly $20 billion.
The interesting thing about this story is that it was a clumsy attempt to correct a problem the government itself had created. The “energy crisis” had been caused primarily by the price controls President Nixon adopted in 1971 as a response to inflation, also of the government’s own making. That’s one way government grows, or metastasizes if you will. It adds new functions to try to correct the problems of existing functions. This new cell growth is always popular inside the Beltway, because it creates jobs and opportunities.
Mr. Melloan notes that the Commission’s recommendation of bringing all intelligence under one master and coordinating the exchange of information sounds like a good idea on the surface, but is it really?:
A new department, Homeland Security, was created under Secretary Tom Ridge only two years ago. It already has spent $70 billion and wants $40 billion more next fiscal year, notes Forbes magazine. The DHS is hard at work, organizing better security for nuclear plants, arranging point-of-origin certification of shipboard containers, asking banks to monitor transfers from places like Saudi Arabia. But Forbes still rates these risks at the “yellow” level and gives a high-risk “red” to the threat of computer network hacking.
Mr. Melloan then points out that more government bureaucracy may be the problem, not the solution:
It wasn’t that the U.S. had no defenses [before the 9/11 attacks]. It has many thousands of law enforcement officers at all levels of government and as many as 20,000 people in the CIA alone. But all of these people, many of them very able, were trapped in a morass of government bureaucracy.
Some of the restrictions are mind-boggling. Most big cities in the U.S. have “sanctuary” ordinances, pressed on them by “civil rights” groups, which prohibit city employees, especially the police, from checking with the Immigration and Naturalization Service on the immigration status of anyone who runs afoul of the law. As a result, thousands of illegal aliens are at large in the U.S. and encounter no trouble with the INS even if they are picked up for theft or drunken driving. And of course, airport screeners, under the same “civil rights” pressures, are barred from “profiling” passengers and thus, in the words of one critic, must accost a “blue haired 70-year-old woman with an aluminum walker” and nine other average travelers for every able-bodied 30-year-old Mideast male.
The INS also has little coordination with the overseas consular offices of the State Department, which approve visas for visitors to the U.S. The State bureaucracy is responding to homeland security fears by tightening up on visa grants, but with no evident system for distinguishing between possible terrorists and innocent students, business travelers and the like. The CIA’s failure to insert spies into al Qaeda was a major shortcoming. One wonders what it does with its estimated $40 billion budget.
Congress is itself fragmented, politically polarized and mired in the oversight methods of yesteryear, and so is not up to the requirements for legislating a more streamlined and efficient defense against terrorism. For example, Secretary Ridge has had to testify to 80 committees and subcommittees since taking office. What they do with all that duplicative information and how he finds time to do anything else is a mystery.