kapkomet

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Aug 23, 2007 -> 03:06 PM) Does anyone know what it would signify if a company announced a repurchase program for their shares? is this healthy? or is this a sign of a bad economic future? It signifies that they want to raise the value of their stock. Market Cap Value = $10,000 with 10,000 shares outstanding = $1.00 per share. They go in and repurchase their own shares and now there is $10,000 with 5,000 shares outstanding = $2.00 per share (without declaring dividends, etc). Long story short, they are trying to not dilute the value of the share price. It's not a bad thing necessarily - if they have the funds to repurchase, then they have at least some cash flow to do so. In the long run, they are trying to have a higher cap value with fewer shares.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 23, 2007 -> 01:22 AM) Medicare already has an enormous number of people in it. That's actually one of the advantages of Medicare; it's sort of the economy of scale thing. So many people use it that doctors just know how it's going to work; you don't have a doctor who has to fill out the forms for 6 different insurance companies to authorize one treatment. Adding more people in might well actually reduce the overhead per person or the overhead per treatment, because the system already exists and is built to handle huge numbers of people. Wow. The whole f***ing population of the United States should work for the government, and there should be caps on what any one person can make. Incentive for no one, yea China!

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ap...p&type=lgns This is great.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 08:41 PM) If you could punch one player on the current sox roster, who would it be? Juan Uribe/Darin Grinderstand/Podsednik/Toby Hall/JC/JG/ oh hell, the list is too long...

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 06:17 PM) International editions are the same book for a boatload less and you can typically find them online (problem is you have to than sell them online because no bookstore will buy them back). How legal it is to buy an international edition in the US, that I don't know. It's perfectly legal.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 04:03 PM) I'll bet many of the people who are in his favor have been involved with dogfights or would be if they had the chance. No, it's the whole "racism" thing...

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 02:39 PM) Friends dad co-signed a car loan for the other daughter here in Illinois. She then moved out of state. Since has stopped making the car payment. He IS on the title, not just the co-signer. Does he have legal right to go get the vehicle since they aren't paying the note? Is there a legal process (I have not found anything other than hiring a repo man online and even that has to be done via the leinholder from what I can tell), or does he just go get it? The bank has the first right to it as you alluded to. However, he is responsible on the note as well and if they are not making payments, he becomes the person they turn to to make the the payment... with that in mind, he just needs to go get the damn thing.

QUOTE(vandy125 @ Aug 16, 2007 -> 01:55 PM) You will probably be very surprised by this, but here it goes. I am actually not against giving homosexuals the same rights and considerations that heterosexual couples receive from a government marriage or civil union. What I am against is my church blessing that as a Christian marriage since I do not see it as fulfilling what God had ordained. I would say that there are many Christians not making the distinction between the government they live under and the rights provided by it and the church's power that they live under. After saying this, we are told to live under the laws of the land we live in, and we need to respect those around us. I see church ordained marriage as different from state marriage. One is a religious thing, the other is not. As such I do not see why we should be pushing those beliefs on the state. Something such as stealing though (as an example), is not a religious thing that is separate from the state. If we see that not being addressed, we do need to push on that. I haven't made my way through the rest of this thread yet, but that is EXACTLY what I think and nice job of putting it down so eloquently.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 02:46 AM) I am watching this game on MLB.tv, and a couple breaks ago the MLB.tv commercial screen was up during pitching change. Then the Sox broadcast comes back in, and all I hear is this: Hawk: mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm DJ: mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Hawk: I luuuuuuuuuv custard and then MLB.tv promptly went back to the commercial screen. Nice.

QUOTE(BigEdWalsh @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 09:41 PM) Well, ridicule all you want, but I'm positive and excited about the future. I'm excited about guys like Egbert and Gio. Fields and to some degree Richar and Owens. Broadway and Poreda. De Los Santos and Shelby. Retherford, Sanchez and Gallagher. I'm excited that Buehrle is here to stay and Jenks is a premier closer. I'm positive in that Vasquez has improved. I'm happy that Konerko is still here and for that matter, but to a lesser degree, A. J., Garland and Dye too. These are just to name a few reasons I'm not totally down on this team.. On the other hand, I didn't expect at the close of the 2005 season that as soon as 2007 the Sox would be a cellar-dweller. That was unthinkable. I was among many that thought the Sox might be on the verge of something resembling a dynasty. But, I really doubt that the Sox are going to suck for years to come. I have my doubts about a lot of things. I also know the organization is not stupid and they see the same things we do ... and UNLIKE most of us here, have a basic understanding as to why. There's so much more behind the scenes that we're not privy to, and certain decisions are made with some of you armchair GM's going WTF but most of the time, there's a purpose behind it. We'll have to wait until February to know what's going to be our chances for 2008. I think we're going to see some positive changes, but I'm not going to sit here and speculate who goes and who comes at this point. They just need to fill the holes.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 06:59 PM) I am very much interested in the future, in b****ing and in praising, thank you very much. I think we all are. There are some, however, that have resumed to the normal "we are going to suckage no matter what" mentality, and IMO those people should wait until when teams report next spring to decide that. If major moves are not made, then we have our answer, and we get to have another year of hell in the Palehose section of soxtalk.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 08:05 PM) By those grounds, no business or government institution should ever do anything to make a system or operation more efficient because it could put people out of work. "Whaddya mean these computers are only 6 months old. We have to replace them now to keep the factories open!" Here's the way I look at it; yes...people at insurance companies would be put out of business. But on the other hand...if you are truly moving to a system which provides lower costs for people, then those dollars that were being turned into the 30% overhead costs in our health care system or were being turned into insurance company profits will be spent by people somewhere else, and that money being spent will generate new business opportunities and new jobs in other sectors. Let's always forget all the trillions of dollars that goes into research ... {{wait}} ***FLUSH*** /carry on

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 05:36 PM) Yeah, the negative people on this site aren't curious about the future. They are - only to b****. (not in green).

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) I'll be very curious to see what his plea deal says, sentence-wise. Hopefully he gets at least a couple years. Racist.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 02:20 AM) Health care is not why we should drop the embargo on Cuba. We should drop the embargo on Cuba because it would mean the end of Castro's regime within two years. It would now... in today's environment.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 07:12 PM) I heard Michael Vick is going to play Football in prison, he will come in a tight end and come out a wide receiver. *rimshot* Now where did you hear that, because you're not smart enough to come up with that on your own.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 03:46 PM) I was thinking about b****'s comments about the lawyer that made him puke in his mouth by filing a lawsuit. Just wondering, but is our system really better off if the lawyers become the judges too? Shouldn't everyone have access to our legal system? We should have a way for a Judge to quickly and cheaply dismiss a case, but I would be uncomfortable if we created a system where it was up to the attorneys to determine if someone has an easy to win case or not. Next topic.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 03:07 PM) The low-cost clinics showing up in some drug stores and such are a good place to start. People don't need doctors visits or emergency rooms for some of the more common things that the clinics can take care of. Medical savings accounts are a good way to go as well. If people have a direct interest in knowing how much their medical services cost, they can possibly have an effect in lowering those costs thru doctor shopping, etc. No, Alpha, I do see the point that the catastrophic cases are a problem. I do think that we need some sort of 'tier' system - I think that would help a lot. You got a sniffle, stop going to the damn ER and go to an urgent care center that is supposed to handle those sorts of things.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 02:31 PM) There's the answer to Alpha's earlier question about why there are so few health care discussions. They end as quickly as they begin because of entrenched ideological positions against "socialized" medicine. Let's talk about moving toward some form of universal health care in this country without using the loaded terminology. It's been said here but it bears repeating – we leave the really important things like national defense and homeland security and disaster response to the feds so why not our health care? We can be productive, contributing members of society, pay into and carry full health coverage, and still be one just major health-related issue away from bankruptcy, foreclosure, etc. I'd say 90% of working America is in that boat. That is a failed health care system in need of more than a few tweaks. And I'll argue that our government fails in homeland security and disaster response. Defense, not as much, but there's a lot to be desired when you look at the VA system (you want to mix defense and health care, that's a disasterous program - although it sounds like there's elements that are perhaps getting better). The government doesn't belong in any business - I'm a HUGE liberitarian when it comes to government interfereing with any element of our society, except when it comes to defense related items and homeland security (but again, that's woefully inadequate right now, IMO). Having said that, there should be protections against some of the idiocy that happens with our current health care system and get it running efficiently. If the incentives are there to straighten it out, it will happen.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 01:37 PM) Wet dreams aside, I'm one of those people. Go ahead and dismiss Moore and Swiftboat him all you want, he's become a Bogeyman rallying point for the radical right and he's obviously not going to change that no matter what he puts out. I was stunned to the point of speechlessness when I got the true story behind the origins of HMOs. To actually hear tape of Halderman and Nixon creaming over a sinister plan to get workling America to cough up more money for less health care is chilling and it was Moore who revealed those origins to a mass audience. It's highly instructive to see which sectors of American big business are trying hard to discredit Moore and his message because it's easier to smear him as a lefty nutjob than to actually respond to the issues he brings into focus. And they have convinced a lot of you to carry water for them. Health care has been important to Moore for more than a decade, and he literally saved a man's life when his TV show held a dying man's funeral on the front lawn of his insurance company to highlight the fact that a hardworking, insured American was dying needlessly because the health care bureaucracy deemed the treatment he needed to be elective and uncoverable by them. A TV stunt got the company to change its mind and cover the treatment and the man lived. Somehow I'm in the minority to think this is a good thing. Michael Moore is nothing but a hack who prays on emotionalism to get his point across. (of course, so is every politician alive today, but that's another topic). So he helped save a man. Kudos (seriously). However, all of the stuff you talk about is the exceptions, not the majority. There are thousands and thousands of lives that are saved all the time for every instance of what you talk about above. Is our system perfect? HELL NO! Does it need changes? HELL YES! Is the answer "socialized" medicine, where I get told what doctor I will see, etc.? NOPE.

Remember: many people HERE (in the filibuster) wet dream every time this man puts out a film and heap the praises on him about what an excellent job he does about "focusing on today's issues"... just sayin'.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Aug 18, 2007 -> 03:32 AM) So Edwards sells his $16 million in stock and ends up with $16 million in cash. How does that help the people? How does divesting himself of the stock reactivly somehow alieve him from his hypocrisy? A good PR move would be for him to sell his shares, and donate thae proceeds to the very people being foreclosed. Again, assbag of assbags.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2007 -> 01:53 PM) For someone who has limited knowledge of the stock market, what's the best place (books, websites, etc.) to begin understanding the fundamentals of investing? I'm aware of CD's, t-bills, mutual funds, and stocks, but I don't know too much beyond that and I really would like to start figuring this all out. My 401k starts in a few weeks, and now that I actually have a real job, I've got some money to start thinking about investing. Rule thumb = put your money in, as much as they will match, and forget about it for 40 years.

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2804/so...ctsheetubx9.jpg Courtesy of Kalapse.

Edwards is the biggest assbag in a race full of assbags.