Re: Re: Re: Baseball and economic growth
Hi again, Sez Jim: Yes, baseball is like craft-based capitalism; So how's cricket different? That's the reference point in this daft proposition, isn't it? Anyway, it might be true that the US and Japan play baseball. But the Cubans love it, too, don't they? What's the conclusion these blokes draw from that. Sez Chas: I think that the phrase "craft-based capitalism" is somewhat contradictory. I think a better phrase would be "craft-based commodity exchange." Even though professional baseball clearly reflects the class system it thrives in (though in surprising ways), the game itself is much more egalitarian than say, football. Baseball is egalitarian -- but also individualistic, because of the batter vs. pitcher battle which dominates the game. Cricket has these things in common. Albeit there are two batters in play at all times, and the bowler's changed every six legitimate deliveries. Captains/foremen are more important on the fielding side, as he places the field (contingent on which bowler is bowling to which batter on what sort of pitch). Still don't see the important differences, though. Geez, it might just be that those who play cricket didn't get out from under perfidious Albion soon enough ... Football reminds me more of the army -- or of simple cooperation-based capitalism, with its hierarchy and its production process, which works more in parallel (everyone doing a different task, all at the same time) rather than in sequence (like an assembly line or a bucket-brigade). Taylorism might be an even more apposite term, no? Now that the boss (coach) is in constant mike-contact with the almost always white superstar foreman (quarter back) - that last bit is right, isn't it?. How about baseball is a combination of proletarians ( the batter with the bat as a tool makes runs by hitting the ball) and peasants who are out in the field. But contradictorily the pitcher is also the capitalist who sets the process in motion with the pitch. The batter and the pitcher are in class conflict. Too far for me ... looks more like a pair of proles being competitive in that 'labour market' thingy. Their mutual alienation played out on behalf of that between the competing bosses. After all, the pitcher gets sacked without notice if the batters do too well, no? Yours avoiding work ... Rob.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Baseball and economic growth
The baseball/cricket proposition was not about sport, well not sport proper. It was, I assume, a lark intended to make light of economic methodology. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Baseball and economic growth
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/08/00 04:11PM At 01:06 PM 5/8/00 -0700, you wrote: Yes, baseball is like craft-based capitalism; I think that the phrase "craft-based capitalism" is somewhat contradictory. I think a better phrase would be "craft-based commodity exchange." Even though professional baseball clearly reflects the class system it thrives in (though in surprising ways), the game itself is much more egalitarian than say, football. Baseball is egalitarian -- but also individualistic, because of the batter vs. pitcher battle which dominates the game. Football reminds me more of the army -- or of simple cooperation-based capitalism, with its hierarchy and its production process, which works more in parallel (everyone doing a different task, all at the same time) rather than in sequence (like an assembly line or a bucket-brigade). CB: Who says we can't do semiotic analysis ? How about baseball is a combination of proletarians ( the batter with the bat as a tool makes runs by hitting the ball) and peasants who are out in the field. But contradictorily the pitcher is also the capitalist who sets the process in motion with the pitch. The batter and the pitcher are in class conflict. Baseball relative to football is competitive era capitalism, and football is capitalism in the era of imperialism with trench warfare and taking territory like WWI. CB
Baseball and economic growth
RE Michael's message Regression of growth rates on dummy variables as to whether countries play baseball or cricket, baseball playing countries have significantly higher rates of growth. Wall, H. J. 1995. "Cricket vs. Baseball as an Engine of Growth." Royal Economic Society Newsletter, 90 (July): pp. 2-3. Actually, a literature on the link between baseball (and sports in general) and capitalism exists. It is very interesting. Given my current role as my son's T-ball (a version of baseball) team's manager, I face every week the issue of the way that baseball is typically run in a way designed to get young kids prepared for life in capitalism. Of course, the kids on my son's team are getting a somewhat different experience. Eric Eric Nilsson Economics California State University, San Bernardino San Bernardino, CA 91711 [EMAIL PROTECTED] winmail.dat
Re: Baseball and economic growth
Yes, baseball is like craft-based capitalism; football more like Taylorist capitalism with enormous specialization and clock management. Cricket is supposed to reflect a more feudal economy. Eric Nilsson wrote: Actually, a literature on the link between baseball (and sports in general) and capitalism exists. It is very interesting. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Baseball and economic growth
I meant an early form of capitalism in which small capitalists hired skilled labor; i.e. master, journeyman, Jim Devine wrote: At 01:06 PM 5/8/00 -0700, you wrote: Yes, baseball is like craft-based capitalism; I think that the phrase "craft-based capitalism" is somewhat contradictory. I think a better phrase would be "craft-based commodity exchange." Even though professional baseball clearly reflects the class system it thrives in (though in surprising ways), the game itself is much more egalitarian than say, football. Baseball is egalitarian -- but also individualistic, because of the batter vs. pitcher battle which dominates the game. Football reminds me more of the army -- or of simple cooperation-based capitalism, with its hierarchy and its production process, which works more in parallel (everyone doing a different task, all at the same time) rather than in sequence (like an assembly line or a bucket-brigade). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
