Balta1701

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 06:02 PM) Because, Tex...The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that companies without a physical presence in a state aren't required to collect state sales taxes. What happened here was Amazon, who collects the money, doenst have a physical presence in IL, it's affiliates do, which it doesn't own...they merely sell through Amazon. Call it a grey area...but it's a law that needed to be reexamined in light of the fact that this has been going on close to a decade now. However, it's being passed on state levels, so when only 4 states out of 50 tell Amazon that it's affiliates have to collect taxes for Amazon, Amazon simply says no thanks, we no longer want your business...and they cut off the affiliate, because Amazon knows it can ship that same product from another state that doesn't require the tax. However, at least a half dozen additional states, including the big gun (California) are likely to pass a similar law in the next few months. California actually passed that law in 2009 but it was vetoed by the failed governor at the time.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 04:04 PM) LOL. This guy is a presidential contender for the GOP? "Contender" is loosely used there. Remember Mike Gravel?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 03:29 PM) we're doing less than half from what I've seen. How on Earth do you get that? The French and British have flown a few nighttime air patrols. The U.S. has pretty much done all the striking as far as I can tell.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 02:27 PM) By "involved" I mean a higher percentage of the U.N. The U.N. really doesn't have the capability to destroy an enemy's air defense network without risking substantial casualties to its forces. The U.S. does. That's why this didn't happen until the U.S. decided it was going to happen.

QUOTE (Tex @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 01:49 PM) These guest worker programs are also bringing in in-demand workers, ones who other companies would be interested in employing. But these ones are easily replaced. The H1b program people are not.

Link

QUOTE (Tex @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 01:46 PM) Will we always pick the rebels or can we sometimes pick the current governments? We pick the current governments if they're buying supplies from our defense contractors. See: Bahrain, Yemen.

QUOTE (Tex @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 01:45 PM) What makes anyone believe that they will have freedom, or that the next regime will allow citizens to be free? We can just bomb them until they do.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 01:04 PM) Im surprised, usually when you are counting how much money the US spends you include all of the logistics. Yet when using the Japan figure, you limit to only the money donated to the Red Cross, which does not include any of the money the US spent in helping Japan. Must be hard to always frame arguments in your favor. Not to mention they are completely different situations, its not like the tomahawks could have been used for the Japan relief. Im just glad we are on the right side for once, its been a long time, and it feels good. I'm actually impressed at how much you missed here. First...yes, I didn't count how much the U.S. was spending on military resources in Japan. I also was equally selective in how much the U.S. is spending on Libya...highlighting only the Tomahawks. Yet you call me out for being selective on one side, then take advantage of it on the other. Reason I didn't include military aid in Japan is...it's hard to have a clue how much is being spent there, just like it's hard to quantify the amount of money spent on the rest of the Libyan campaign, although it's certainly in the hundreds of millions of dollars. And this statement..."its not like the tomahawks could have been used for the Japan relief. " presumes that we won't spend money to replace the ordinance just fired.

Those friends though intervened not because of any humanitarian situation, they intervened because it was in their own strategic self-interest to weaken the British. And furthermore...the debt that they rang up in fighting that war was a key contributor to the collapse of their own government a few years later. Although there may be a small self-interest here (insuring continued access to Libyan oil), I don't count that as much of a paralle.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 12:42 PM) How on earth could anyone claim that wireless prices have gone up!?!??! Dear Lord, text messages used to be expensive as s***. I now have a computer in the palm of my hand capable of displaying and delivering limitless data and pay monthly about the same as I did in 2002. Of course, I'm also on Sprint... which makes me a smart person with a smartphone. Adding more capabilities is not what I meant.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 12:41 PM) It depends on how the rest of the pen ends up. I would imagine they would want a legit long man in there, so it could very well be Marquez. For 2 games I think they'd be content with Pena doing that...but I don't think I'd want to go into the season with both Sale and Infante in the pen after both of them stank during ST.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 12:34 PM) Well...I'm not entirely sure where you get this...but most consumer products have become cheaper, not more expensive. 10 years ago a 50" Plasma TV cost about 10 grand. Today they cost about 600$. Same goes for computer products, etc. And we aren't talking about lesser quality. Newer faster processors are often cheaper than their predecessors were at release. The only thing I see getting more expensive is automobiles...well, and food/gas, but I don't consider them in the same class of products. Has the price of wireless service gone up or down over the last decade? I'd say that the bare minimum plans have pretty much tracked inflation, while the upper level plans have skyrocketed in price.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 12:25 PM) With Humber now looking like a part of rotation come OD, there are 2 questions I'm asking. 1. Do Sox go with 12 or 11 pitchers? (They always go with 12 but this questions alwas pop up in ST, even by the beat writers) 2. Who makes the last pitching roster spot? Especially if Humber is taking a spot start or two, you have to go with 12 pitchers in case he implodes. I'd say it becomes Marquez or Infante. Infante has gotten outs in the bigs but has been crappy this ST, Marquez has been better this ST.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 12:25 PM) They sure don't...but if we see nothing but upward price pressure after this merger, they'd risk being busted up again...I don't think it's a risk they'd be willing to take again. Then again, you never really know...maybe they've forgotten what happened last time, after all, it was a long time ago...and they may be egotistical enough to think it won't happen again. How many mergers have we seen undone in the past 25 years because of excessive upwards price pressure? The answer winds up being "we need less regulation not more competition". Then prices go up farther.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:58 AM) It's easier because they can just decide to set a price, where Big Oil can't just set a price...because the street sets it. That said, it's REALLY easy to get busted if you make a back room deal to price fix. I don't think AT&T and Verizon would do it...they may, but I just don't see it happening. Just one executive, secretary, janitor or someone that overhears has to blow the whistle...and your kingdom falls apart...and the company replaces you and anyone involved within a days time... Then you get to spend some time in jail and lose all your money fighting it in court. Most executives have less than zero interest in price fixing these days, putting their jobs on the line knowing they will probably get busted. Back in the day, executives didn't make millions per year and have millions upon millions in stock, with stock prices in the mid 30's...so the risk to price fix may have been worth the possible reward...these days, they already have everything. They don't have to officially do the backroom deal to notice when their only real competitor raised their prices by 25%.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:27 AM) Fun Fact of the Day: Your Tax Dollars At Work For another comparison, that $81 million spent solely on Tomahawk missiles is larger than the current amount pledged to the Red Cross Japan relief fund.

Asdrubal Cabrera suffered an apparent "Right leg injury".

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:47 AM) Sorry but the oil industry cannot price fix the same way that AT&T and Verizon can, since oil is traded on the public commodities exchange. So bad example. Big Oil can try to spread fear, etc...but in the end, it's not easy to price fix something anyone can purchase on a commodities market. AT&T and Verizon, however, don't deal in commodities that people can buy, like "I just bought 500000 gigs of data" and I'm gonna hoard it because it's a finite commodity. Apples and Oranges here. Their price fixing it much simpler...you charge 50$ for data...and so will we! So, as far as I can tell, you're saying that it's actually easier and more legal for telecom companies to wind up price fixing, because data isn't a publicly traded commodity...yet somehow I'm supposed to think that ATT and VZN will be scared of the threat of legal action?

Metropolitans to release Oliver Perez. Between Perez and Luis Castillo, who was released last week, that's about $18 million in bad contracts they've just given up on.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:39 AM) Anyway...the reason I offered that example that old is because companies don't lobby together and price fix...BECAUSE it shows you companies don't want to get indicted on price fixing, as you just f***ing said AT&T and Verizon would basically do. Getting caught "price-fixing" these days just means that companies got sloppy. The ways around it are just too easy. If the oil industry can get away with uniform price changes across stations, all happening in the same order every time, then all you really need is a few lawyers who know the law well to slip around them.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:27 AM) Fun Fact of the Day: Your Tax Dollars At Work That amount is probably dwarfed by the costs of using the handful of B-2's that were deployed.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:22 AM) I'm sure Verizon and AT&T want to get indicted on price fixing. Ask Archer Daniels how that worked out. A $100 million fine that was, like most fines, small relative to the size of the company and the money they made off the plan? And your best example comes from 1993?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 09:18 AM) It is still more competition than 1. Until they realize that they can lobby together on the same issues.