Balta1701

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 11:04 AM) Should the government subsidize industry group advertising for all US-based industries? This is, btw, quite literally how places like Germany, with China moving in, have built strong domestic manufacturing capacities...by establishing policies designed solely to benefit and grow domestic industries. They've been more than willing to lose money on those campaigns in order to build the industry up, and they have succeeded in their efforts in many cases.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 11:07 AM) I don't think the league overall benefits from expansion. Sure the owners pull down another billion/billion and a half from the franchise fees, but with as hard as it is to field a 25 man roster and fill a pitching staff now, the level of talent in the league doesn't benefit from 50 more AAA players in the majors. Again I'd reply that it seems to have gotten quite a bit easier to fill out a 25 man roster with legit MLB level players over the last decade. They might well have overdone expansion in the 90's, but it's been 15 years, and the continuing decrease in offense (presumably no longer related to removal of drugs) suggests to me that the pitching staffs in particular are catching up. Plus, if you assume continued expansion of overseas players coming over, or arriving from Latin America, you've got the NBA-type scenario setup, where there is regular arrival of new talent that wasn't represented 15 years ago.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:22 AM) With the realignment of Houston to give each league 15 teams, the topic has come up again about adding another 2 MLB teams. Plus with Tampa looking likely to move in the next few years, let's look at the cities involved and debate. I'll move some of the posts on this from PHT, then give a long list to work from, and we can see what order people would put them in... BTW, doesn't Tampa have an incredibly hard lease to break?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 11:04 AM) Should the government subsidize industry group advertising for all US-based industries? I'm not sure that "Subsidize" is the correct word here, since no taxpayer funds are at risk, it's just making use of the already extant system of collecting and distributing taxes to allow funds to be pooled in a certain way. The government definitely does subsidize US based agricultural industry advertising already, to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars. It'd be a lot nicer if those subsidies were set up like this.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:57 AM) I'm not certain that is the ideal world. Is it really ideal if we treat repeat offenders with lengthy criminal histories the same as grandma with a lifetime of service and good deeds the same? It seems like we are going to err on one side or the other and perhaps we should err on the side of victims, but it doesn't seem fair. If you had infinite resources in police departments and there was absolutely no downside associated with investigating allegations, why wouldn't you? It's the fact that these 2 standards aren't met which forces you to evaluate the veracity based not on the claim but on the claimant.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:54 AM) Actually I 100% agree with that. You are right in that if the program doesn't exist, and if the industry is incapable of doing this themselves, then they won't be able to spend the money on an ad campaign. That means less jobs (maybe a dozen of them). Of course, the industry could also find other ways to raise the revenue for the campaign, as many professional and commercial groups do, without the government. So, the industry is incapable of doing so itself, no taxpayer dollars are on the line, the government has setups that are easily capable of doing this and does so for 18 other industries, doing so through the government would reduce costs all around, the industry asks for it to happen, it provides a benefit to the U.S. economy, but government is always bad and I can't give an exact answer why but it's a slippery slope since government is bad and it shouldn't happen. I feel like you're the 10 year old kid taking away my tricycle for no reason but to see me cry.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:58 AM) How? By cutting spending but reducing revenues in equal or greater amounts, leading to reduced aggregate demand and continued slow growth and high unemployment? Working great in the UK.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:53 AM) Cousin of the first victim. I am reserving judgement on this one. The victims offered four others who would collaborate and none did. Of course "Reserving judgment" is an obvious step here. There haven't even been charges filed.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:52 AM) Oh good, Balta and SS2K5 are here to argue something to death, so no one is willing to step in and actually talk about the question posed in the thread. Of course, the actual points made earlier get ignored as well. but hey, Mark Kotsay!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:50 AM) You are still getting the government involved when it shouldn't be, and there are dangers every time you do that, beyond what the supposedly scheduled cost structure is in the current plan. But that is something I suspect you won't ever acknowledge exists. You're damn right I won't acknowledge that there are risks here, just like you won't acknowledge that "fewer U.S. jobs" is a risk associated with shutting the program down.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:49 AM) Then let the INDUSTRY handle it! Government should not be getting involved in this, it is patently silly. If the U.S. taxpayer is on the hook for nothing and the effort winds up promoting the sale of U.S. produced products, this is a good thing for the U.S. taxpayer and it is patently silly to oppose it.

"A guy who hit .270 off the bench in the national league should not be able to find a job!" is the best reason you can give for why expansion shouldn't happen? Hell, line me up for 2 more teams.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:46 AM) I hope is not being sarcastic anyway. If the Yankees want Danks, you sure as hell ask for their top guys. Look at it this way. They can have Danks for next year while giving up prospects, or they can go 5-6 years and $100m+ for Wilson. And then go 5-6 years and $80 million for Danks.

Link

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:36 AM) Sure, let the Bush tax cuts expire=take a big chunk out of the deficits. Expand the Bush tax cuts permanently while cutting even more from the top brackets, capital gains and corporate taxes=expand the deficit. And "$500 billion in Medicare cuts" to effectively bring health care costs 1/2 of the way to under control in the long-term projection = dealing with the long-term deficit.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:35 AM) That's the part that puzzles me. If the growers want to get together with the sellers and add 15 cents to each tree to fund advertising that helps all of them, great, go ahead. Why get the government involved in an advertising campaign at all? So that it is actually an industry-wide effort.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 10:30 AM) Please no expansion. It is hard enough to fill the rosters of the 30 teams we have now. I do not want to see the talent pool deluded anymore than it already is. The continuing decrease in offense over the past 5 years has led a number of people to conclude that the pitching levels in MLB have finally caught up with the expansion of the 1990's.

Sigh. Group of Christmas tree farmers approaches the department of Agriculture in 2008, proposes adding a $.15 "Fee" on to the sale of Christmas trees. The fee would be entirely dedicated to funding advertising encouraging people to purchase christmas trees. Something similar to the "Got Milk", "Pork the Other White Meat", and "Beef it's what's for dinner" campaigns. After 3 years of study, a comment period where hundreds of growers commented and gave a 90% positive response rate, agreement is reached to add $.15 to the price of live Christmas trees to fund advertising. Again, entirely proposed by the growers, supported by the growers, Government only serves as an enabler so that the money can be collected and pooled nationally. Of course, the Right wing freaks out about Obama's war on Christmas trees with his new tax. And it takes about a week for the administration to give up on the proposal and delay it indefinitely. Sigh.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 08:09 AM) Sanchize is awful as well. Anyone else think that the Jets are #1 on the list of likely Peyton trade spots this offseason?

Link

Zero non-mormon teams are excluded by that standard.

F***, i'm voting for Frank.

Here's the real issue Tex. In an ideal world, everyone would be investigated fairly and all accusations and charges would hold equal merit at the beginning. The police would then investigate all of them and determine whether there is merit, regardless of anyone's reputation. Charges would then be brought impartially, and then guilt would be determined on that same basis. Furthermore, if charges were never brought against a person, then the fact that they were investigated would remain unknown and no damage would happen to the accused. But that's not the system we have. There are only so many police resources, so the police have to judge how to deploy those resources. They have to have a certain level of belief to begin a serious investigation. And news that "We're investigating person X for raping young boys" will damage that person's reputation even if the investigation fully exonerates them somehow.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 12:16 AM) Hey, Halladay wasn't the reason they lost. Unless you want to blame him for their inadequacies on offense. He gave up that run in the first 2 batters of game 5.

QUOTE (MindGame2004 @ Nov 17, 2011 -> 10:51 PM) I seriously don't understand why they do this every time they go to hire anyone for anything. First guess...money. Second guess...keeps the boss happy/comfortable. Third guess...gives you a convenient excuse/fall guy if things don't work out.