Balta1701

C. Sale-A- J. Crain-C J. Quintana- A- H. Santiago- A- J. Peavy- C+ M. Lindstrom- B A. Garcia- B- A. Rios- C A. Reed- B M. Thornton- C A. Ramirez- C- N. Jones- B- C. GillaspieD+ D. Viciedo- D+ G. Beckham- D- A. Rienzo- B+ A. Dunn- C- D. Veal- D+ J. Keppinger- F J. Phegley- D- T. Flowers- D- P. Konerko- F D. Axelrod- D R. Ventura- F D. Cooper- B J. Manto- F Fathom, you were much more generous than I was.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 05:34 PM) Again, we're all paying the bill. Because if we keep them uninsured, they'll be smart enough not to get in fender-benders. Or at least we can pretend that they never have to leave the house, because otherwise, we'd be paying the much larger bill. After all, a $20,000 bill for a fender-bender is just what this hypothetical person needs to teach him or her the lesson that he or she shouldn't be poor.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 04:57 PM) So yes, federal workers get special treatment...they get special treatment by being allowed into the exchanges. Their special treatment is getting the health plans created on the Obamacare exchanges. QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 05:15 PM) They get subsidies, special treatment. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/35937...jonathan-strong H. Christ, My last sentence says "Their special treatment is getting the health plans created on the Obamacare exchanges". You then reply "they get subsidies, special treatment" as though somehow you' think you're making an intelligent point. I JUST SAID THAT. Is it your contention that the PPACA required the federal government to not offer health benefits to any employees anywhere?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 05:00 PM) Roughly $16k/year is the cutoff for medicaid. At that point the person we're talking about isn't going to be able to afford the ACA rates of coverage anyway. Actually, first of all yes they would. The plans have generally been coming in at about 15% lower costs than the CBO projected a couple years ago. That means the typical bronze level plan would, on its own, cost in the range of $1200 per year. For health coverage on its own, that isn't bad. I'd have paid that happily when I was below the poverty line. However, there is a substantial tax subsidy piled on top of that for low income earners. Using yoru $16k a year example, the subsidy the federal government would pay to purchase insurance, for a "silver" level plan, would be $1500, with the person's out of pocket yearly expenses being ~$500. (used this subsidy calculator) At $16000 per year, buying private insurance in the exchanges will cost $500 for your person (non-smoker assumed). Man I wish this existed 8 years ago, you have no idea.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 04:51 PM) However both sides managed to make it so that they and their workers aren't subject to it. Too bad they get to miss out from the awesomeness that is Obamacare! This actually isn't true, it's just a talking point completely ignorant of the actual law. The law required Obamacare options to be open to Congress and their staffers as well. However, the law also does not open the exchanges to large employers until 2017, and I think you'll probably agree the Federal Government is something of a large employer. Consequently, the Office of Personnel Management had to pass a rule allowing the federal government to contribute to plans in the exchanges which otherwise would not have been authorized until 2017 in order to follow the spirit of the law. Otherwise, the combination of these 2 competing claims would have effectively banned the government from providing insurance to its employees. So yes, federal workers get special treatment...they get special treatment by being allowed into the exchanges. Their special treatment is getting the health plans created on the Obamacare exchanges.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 04:38 PM) Lets call a spade a spade. Im sure that many politicians, including Obama, would be open to discussing how to change the law for the better.... Actually, there are a few issues that have come up with implementation that we'd really like to tweak by passing small laws through Congress, but the party with the majority in the House is refusing to do anything which could improve the bill on the grounds that they want as many people to hate it as possible. For example, the way the bill was written it wound up excluding clergy members from receiving subsidies to purchase insurance through their churches. A simple, couple-line legislative fix would fix that. However, the Republicans will not allow any such fix to come up for a vote, demanding that clergy must suffer in order to demonstrate that the bill is a bad bill. As a consequence, several hundred thousand clergy members could be forced to make purchases on the exchanges and drop their current coverage as a consequence. We'd be happy to fix this and could do so without a problem if the bill were allowed to come up for a vote. One party will not allow any such things to happen.

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 02:08 PM) That was optional. Yeah, but it took effort to decide not to enter the code. Great display of the psychological difference between opting-in and opting out.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 01:45 PM) I wouldn't be against resigning Floyd as a sixth starter. For next year I think we should expect him to be "a veteran presence in the minor leagues" nothing more, based on the report of his injury.

Somebody appears to have scammed another fortune by getting news of the Federal Reserve's announcement that they'd continue their bond-buying program a couple milliseconds early.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 11:39 AM) What happens to states' budgets when the federal medicaid subsidy ends in a few years? It doesn't end. They cover 100% of the expansion for the first few years and ~95% forever. Medicaid itself was created as a partially federal, partially state funded program. This expansion is a vastly better deal for the states than the creation of Medicaid itself was.

Worth noting that according to Ptatc, Floyd's injury was more severe than the typical tommy john surgery so it's possible he won't be ready to begin throwing until the middle of the season next year. That said, I'd agree there's a solid chance he resigns on a minor league deal and starts his rehab in Charlotte mid-season.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 11:37 AM) People pin way too much of the results on coaches and managers. They can make a difference, but not a 20-30 game difference. People think Ventura needs to go, yet they also say all these players need to go. If the Sox lost because of the manager, shouldn't they keep the players? If the players are bad, how do you blame the losing on the manager? I would absolutely have agreed with you... Until I watched the 2012 White Sox follow up the 2011 White Sox.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 09:16 AM) Why would Girardi leave the ultimate managing job in baseball to work for a perennial loser? Isn't his contract up? The Yankees may be at the "go another direction" point. For all I know they might be wanting to throw money at Scioscia.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 25, 2013 -> 08:02 AM) So, 4 days from the end of the season, is there any surgery that isn't season-ending? How long did Adam Dunn stay out after the Appendix?

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 09:56 PM) I appreciate the free legal interpretation. Has there ever been a grievance filed for something like this? I can't recall any such instance. If so, put him on the DL in April, then release him. No grievance, mistreatment, etc. Then we can sign other players. Or just release him. I have no idea why Robin is DHing him tonight. Not that I know of but that's probably because no team is dumb enough to misuse the DL. ARoid however was supposedly suing the Yankees over their medical advice.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 09:26 PM) Agreed. Just put him on the DL and leave him there. Sox should have sent him to the same Doc that is operating on Keppinger. At which point they file a grievance against the team and a lawsuit and the GM gets fired and no one ever signs with the white sox again for mistreating their players.

Ok, that was pretty darn good.

“@CST_soxvan: White Sox would be first team since 1915 Philadelphia A's to have worst fielding pct in baseball the year after leading majors.”

Don't f*** this up Disney.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 06:00 PM) Same surgery as Flowers. Recovery will be 2-6 months depending on what they find out what is wrong. Ok, what the hell were these guys doing that hurt all of their shoulders?

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 05:59 PM) Ahh yes. You're right. I didn't remember that. I don't think there was even a yawn at that one. Dewayne Wise was on the roster this year.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 04:04 PM) Right, and then their penalties were basically "by decree." There was no appeal process. They didn't handle this particularly well, as they usually don't, but let's not pretend that the whole country wasn't behind kicking the s*** out of PSU at the time. Yeah, but again, I think that there was enough negotiation for the higher-ups at Penn State to know that they were effectively getting an appeal-style deal. I certainly got the impression that the NCAA seriously wanted the death penalty and Penn State basically said "we'll completely stop fighting this and we'll issue statements supporting you if you switch to the harshest non-death-penalty punishment you can do". I certainly got the impression that there were a few very loud board members in the hours after the punishments came down who were threatening all sorts of lawsuits and then suddenly they shut up a few hours later, as if they were told "you file this and they shut the program down". Am I wrong?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 03:59 PM) Bilas was on Cowherd this morning and pointed out that Penn St commissioned the Freeh Report, which was then used by the NCAA to beat them to death with it. Sort of sets a bad precedent for schools doing their own investigations. Why bother? The internal thing that we rapidly heard after the punishment came down was that if they felt Penn State wasn't cooperating, their response was going to be a multi-year death penalty for the program.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 03:46 PM) The reason that the NCAA did this is because its semi-unclear if criminal actions unrelated to the sport were subject to sanctions by the NCAA in the first place. I dont really see a booster situation as comparable seeing as I doubt many people would say that the reason Sandusky was raping kids was to help get Penn State recruits. Which is ultimately the NCAA's function, to keep a fair playing field. NCAA is a joke regardless. However, it is fair to say that covering up what he was doing and trying to protect the football team and football culture at Penn State would definitely matter in terms of recruiting and other things being done by the program. They didn't cover it up because they support pedophilia (I presume), they most likely did so to protect their cash-cow program.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 24, 2013 -> 02:30 PM) Sorry that was in reference to the Zygi Wilf (Vikings Owner) article on his RICO charges, which puts the stadium in jeopardy. And since you couldn't include a link I had to go find one to know what you were talking about.