bmags

1.4 trillion is handwaving the costs away.

Man, Mendick didn't take to his promotions that well.

Yeah, Mizzou doesn't have much in the coffers for a PF after Liddell right now. I think McKinney/Liddell are plan 1a right now, but if Carteare Gordon suddenly backs out of SLU maybe that changes.

Eh, you are jumping to conclusions based on no evidence. "It's probably going to be high premiums and high deductions" Based on what? It's not like they'd remove subsidies in a move like this, but for those on the other end of the sliding scale they could be paying significantly less with much more cost certainty year to year. And all of the single payer talk uses out of pocket costs at treatment and hand waves away the significant payroll tax that it would require. It also does make an easier on ramp to consuming the insurance through insurer population.

That's interesting I guess I didn't think about what level winter league competition was at.

The multiple different proposals are starting to get very exciting. I do think this is my preferred approach. The reason being I think part of the reason America spends so much on Healthcare is because a small portion wants to. This would allow the group that just wants and needs basic healthcare to get a good exchange at a good price. https://www.vox.com/health-care/2017/10/20/...-x-single-payer

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 09:12 AM) It's not like Theo is working on some razor thin budget, he's thrown some money around too. I'd probably take Theo #1 too, but I'm just impressed with the full roster the Dodgers built. For all the money on their books, their lineup last night was full of guys who don't make much money at all. I mean I don't think any org can compare with the scouting and player dev behemoth the dodgers have put together. You have to admire the patience on the part of the Dodgers though and Friedman. They knew they've had good enough teams to get in the playoffs. They didn't blow their talent to get proven playoff studs, they just kept believing in their scouting and depth. But now they've made it to the world series, and have an endless farm system there to supplement or trade with. Some of these guys are going to come back to earth. But the "have 10 starting pitchers on your roster and rotate the 5 hottest at any given time" seems like it might be a game changer.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 16, 2017 -> 05:54 PM) Was just going to add this. The other critical benefit is to allow scouts to travel between locations more easily. Hawk mentioned this in passing during a game relatively late in the season, saying he thought Jerry was nuts at first, but that it has proven to be quite advantageous. Yeah the amount of teams in the Carolinas is incredible.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 08:56 AM) GarPax think Kris Dunn might even be better than Cam Payne. Dunn is out with an injury until saturday, so I guess he'll have his moment to shine. Probably not good to have your home opener with only the #7 overall draft pick from the package you acquired for your star playing.

So Lauri looked good, but last night I think I confronted for first time how bad our backcourt is at least until Lavine gets here.

I'm very skeptical someone would be able to make a judgment "okay, at this distance I can probably beat the throw, but I may be coming at too high a speed to consistently make contact with the bag"

QUOTE (KagakuOtoko @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 02:58 PM) I think Q gets shelled tonight. I don't think he's pitched this much in his career and I don't think the Dodgers want to give the Cubs any momentum. Kershaw wants to shake his boogey man and the Dodgers roll. Probably a similar scoreline to game 1, 5-2. You are good at this.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 04:07 PM) If you think Im blaming people for accurately calling Trump something youre missing the point. The point is that people inaccurately (or accurately depending on your perspective) calling other people something, may have led to calling Trump it meaningless. And now that we have gotten to the point where it may be meaningless, you need to re-frame the argument. Im not blaming anyone, if I blame anyone its the people who cant think for themselves and realize this on their own. But since I cant change them, I have to work in their confines. (edit) To go back to the Earth is flat argument. Lets say I have a picture of the round Earth and someone keeps disagreeing. I am not blaming the person who shows the picture, I am blaming the person who wont accept the fact. BUT, if my life depends on convincing that person that the Earth is round, I certainly am going to do whatever it takes to convince them, even if it means that I stop using the picture and I try to convince them in another way. Thats the point. Its not about the truth, its about what "people believe" and eventually you have to accept that it is their belief, no matter how wrong you may think it is. And until you accept that its their belief, you will be pounding your head against a wall. I understand. Different audiences require different arguments but I do hope there is always space to make and think through the argument you truly believe in with the words you believe in.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 03:48 PM) Strangesox, Where did I say you cant call them "conservative". The comment is "evil". Do you believe that being a conservative makes you "evil?" Bmags, Again. Because I cant control what other people do. What I can control is what I do. What I can do is to try and do everything in my power to accomplish what goals I want. I dont want another President like Trump. If that means that I have to do certain things to ensure it, I will. If those things dont harm me in anyway, then why do I care? I dont care what people would or would not do if anyone else was President. I care what I have to do to try and make sure that Trump wont win in 2020. That is the beginning and the end of the argument of why do this. My response prior I think addresses this. And while I understand your critique as a form of effective messaging, I resist the idea of applying fault of Trump's election on people accurately calling Trump as uniquely dangerous instead of those without the ability to critically interpret obvious signs correctly.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) Do you think Obama is evil? Do you think Truman is evil? Thomas Jefferson? I could make arguments for all of them. But I leave that term for people who I truly think are trying to purposefully do bad things. And that is the difference, evil requires intent. If Bush was truly evil, he wouldnt be friendly with Obama, he wouldnt be out there trying to make things better. If you cant see the difference between Trump and Bush, I dont really know what else to say. Here's why I'm fine with your argument, because sure, evil is an absolute. But I find it immature that the approach is to force others to accept the framing that there can be no nuance in framing someone as evil. And I say this because it is so stupidly happening with racism. If you call someone a racist, people jump in front of him like heroes "No! No! he can't be a racist! Racists carry flaming torches and chant nazi phrases!" And when they ARE carrying torches and chanting nazi phrases "No, no, they...need to be physically attacking a minority and saying they are doing it because they are a minority!" Bush may not have been purposefully doing evil things because he likes doing things that offend the conscience, but he enabled and hired a whole lot of people in the administration that he was the executive that performed many evil acts. And maybe this was just a lack of uncertainty in the world. BUt their "we know the answers now give us the information to prove it" mindset created these gigantic cracks in the world that many innocent people slipped into with no way to get out. Crime charges with no way to prove innocence, captivity with torture, never ending war with no clarity with what constitutes success. But, at the very least, there were many moments in the Bush admin that showed they were still operating within the norms of American politics and civility. Ashcroft holding orders. When Scooter Libby was being prosecuted there was no sense they'd just pardon him before and refuse an investigation. They seemed to accept, if not respect, opposition performed through our institutional means. And that last graph is what I just don't see happening. They do not respect that checks can happen if they do not benefit them. And make the case that anything that does not benefit them is illiberal, but worse, partisan and part of a conspiracy. It's incredibly dangerous.

Maybe we should address the fact that when several Republican lawmakers had to identify what made Hitler evil they focused on expanded government run healthcare. Maybe this is a more deeply ingrained issue of not being able to identify illiberal, anti-democratic ideas among conservatives that is more dangerous than liberals being as careful in calling out degrees of bad.

Why does it feel like if Democrats elected Susan Sarandon for president we wouldn't be hearing that it was actually the fault of republicans for not creating an accurate tier system of liberal labels to help us decide who was an acceptable candidate.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 02:25 PM) My post wasn't a take on if people thought it was negative or positive and I wasn't taking a position on it. Just a question I felt like tossing out since I have seen a lot of posts saying we didn't get enough (it does feel a little light but not really negative to the deal). I think in general I was fine with our approach of making sure we get a top prospect and not make it up in value, but with the Yankees deal it was just nervewrecking from the start as Rutherford by the time we made the trade had shown a noticeable lack of power. But the yankees are also a team whose depth I would have been happy to raid and go after that 8-15 range instead of top 5/20-30 ranges.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 01:50 PM) What do people think would have been an acceptable deal with the Yanks? Subtract Kahnle and Rutherford from the deal and its close? Replace Rutherford with a lower prospect than even Polo and Clarkin? Then we make Kahnle the closer post-trade and beginning of next season to flip at deadline? I actually still think I feel more negative to the trade than I actually am. But what killed me about that deal was the fake one that was "reported" just before the real announcement that had Mateo, Florial and Adujar going back to Sox. I was at the game and got duped by it and nearly spit out my beer I was so happy. It was an infusion of super athletic position players. SO when it came back Rutherford, Clarkin and Polo, especially with Clippard basically just being a dump for cash, it was super disappointing. The road to development is long and winding, but I really want some production out of this group, from that trade.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 01:40 PM) I assume the franchises get some kind of cut/revenue from concerts even though the stadiums are "owned" by others. Could be wrong I could see Reinsdorf possibly getting away with that somehow but I would be shocked if Bears get a cut of any of the many soccer/concert events at Soldier Field.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 01:15 PM) The G-Rate also hosts the occasional concert I think people's response around why Bears/Sox would car is whether it would even affect them as Soldier field would be Chicago Park District and GRF would be Illinois Sports Facilities Authority.

I enjoy hashing over Tatis as much as the next guy but I like to keep my Eloy threads on Eloy, the most exciting sox prospect I can remember.

This is hypnotizing

Okay so make it 26 roster spots.

Worse, they probably didn't scout Bell because they had Bobby and Niko so they were "set". Which is a good example of one of the worst faults of Forman, his complete lack of creativity when it comes to the use of roster spots, salaries and players.