Balta1701

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:49 AM) Walking outside isn't suspicious enough. What would your argument be? He looks illegal so I reasonable suspected him to be illegal? Come on. Let's use common sense here. Oh come on, you know full well that a police officer in a public area has nearly unlimited power to decide that a person looks suspicious.

QUOTE (Tex @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:44 AM) That was good. BTW both of your arguments are spiralling downward, not upward as is your usual path. I'm struggling to get a wireless printer to work so I didn't have time to run through the whole list.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:36 AM) No, what's really amazing is how you live in a fantasy world about the health care system. Yup. One with math.

Btw, liked this one:

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:40 AM) Wrong. Only after "lawful contact" can they then get to the "reasonable suspicion" part. It's not circumventing anything. As written they cannot just simply walk up to every brown person and ask for proof of their status. Why? How is the latter not lawful contact? As long as they're not going up to your house and drawing you outside to ask for your papers, if you're in a public place, don't the police have the right to approach you?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:25 AM) That's the scary part -- I tend to think that most of Chicago is more civilized than LA is. I point to the riots in the 90's for example. How in the world we have a higher murder rate than they do is just unacceptable. Civilized? That's an odd way to put it.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:33 AM) The whole Chicago public school system is still a gigantic mess, and it doesn't seem as Daley has helped it very much. He has helped lower the urban flight, but it still is a problem due to the lack of quality education in the city. Unfortunately...this is a problem in basically every urban area. There just isn't the money in those systems to fix them.

QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:30 AM) I wouldn't say it's that bad of a contract. The guy's averaged around 50 HR/140 RBI for the last 5 years & been top 5 in the MVP vote each of those years. If he does that until he's 36, no one's going to care about how much the contract is for. It's the $25 million at age 36 that you have to call risky.

I'm amazed how effective including the phrase "you'd just repeat the word nothing" was at getting you to repeat the word "nothing".

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:25 AM) yes i meant van. And a passenger van is one thing. Look, we all know what we're talking about here. We all know what looks suspicious and what doesn't. And if you can't then you can't harass those people. That's the point. Sure a small percentage of people will get harassed for no good reason, they'll sue, and they'll most likely get compensated. That's how our system works. No different than any other law out there that cops abuse and enforce illegally. My viewpoint on this is talking with my cop buddies who work in the worst areas of Chicago. They're limited in what they can do despite what common sense would dictate. This legislation should have been worded differently, and should have included more detail as to what reasonable suspicion means. But the intent of the law is good, and I don't see much abuse happening that wouldn't happen with any other law. In other words...we're back to the real point of this law...as long as it rounds up the illegals, who cares if it requires every hispanic looking person to carry their papers.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:27 AM) There are no true cost controls. All they do is offset the money to taxes/government spending. Nothing was done to control the costs of drugs or medical services. Nothing. I could go down the list again, but you'd just repeat the word "nothing".

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:19 AM) We WERE behind New York and LA. Both cities with larger populations, no less. Just a note...wait until we wind up seeing the end result of what the housing bust does to L.A.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:15 AM) But you're reading it like it says if you see one brown person that's enough to pull them over. That's wrong. 14 people shoved in a fan can and should be suspicious. That's your window. White/black/brown, doesn't matter. But see here...you're applying your judgment to probable cause, with the specific goal of finding a workable solution to apply the law without having it look like you're being racist, as a way to justify the law. Your argument is "It's possible to use this law in a way that isn't contradictory, therefore the law is ok." No one is checking immigration papers if they find a van full of 14 white people unless they're deliberately trying to make the statistics look non-racist, and you know that. And if they were...well, that's reason enough for me not to go to Arizona. Because I don't want to have to carry my passport with me.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 10:13 AM) While that's all well and good in a theoretical projection...how much would you like to bet that it will be FAR more than 1%? I don't mean to actually bet, either...I'm just saying, if you believe that figure, I have some oceanfront property to sell you in Arizona. I'm telling you right now, that the costs of this law are going to spiral out of control in the years to come. Medical care will get more expensive, and your premiums will rise along with it. The Government will end up spending WAY more on this than they 1) envisioned, or 2) admitted they would have too (lied). Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised at all if we found out that some of the cost control measures included in the bill worked a lot better than the projections.

Link Link. Of course, you all understand that the U.S. taxpayer is going to wind up footing the bill for all of the lost tourist dollars, agricultural production, beach cleanup, etc.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:57 AM) I guess you need to point me to the part of the bill that says "when you see brown people, expect them to be illegal, and demand proof of their immigrant status." That's the issue with the law. It allows for searches based on reasonable suspicion, and any rational person would assume that reasonable suspicion basically is essentially race (i.e. the "you don't expect 14 white people in a van speaking english to be illegal immigrants). It then states that you can't use race, because otherwise the ACLU would already have won the lawsuit. So either, you violate the race provision or its unenforceable.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:49 AM) I think the fact is there are laws in every state and also at the federal level that have the potential for abuse, yet we trust other offices/agencies/people not to abuse them. Why make a big stink about this one without being worried about all of them? If they do illegal stuff and if they abuse their powers, the victim can have his day in court and be compensated accordingly. I think the benefit of the bill far outweighs the negatives. And I hope this type of bill (cleaned up) gets enacted everywhere. Because this law is unenforceable without abuse.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:44 AM) I disagree with about 95% of the things you post, but I will say this....you are always calm...at least you come off that way. You're like the Lovie Smith of Soxtalk. I'll let you decide if I meant that as a cheap shot or not. Great, my future rides on the motivation of Julius Peppers...

Link

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:30 AM) Why do people get upset at the Caps in posts? It's just adding extra emphasis on something. The same you would do if you were conversing face to face. Now if it's all caps...you're just yelling and I won't stand for it. I like responding to being yelled at by calmly posting graphs.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:20 AM) If they do that though, won't the Bulls virtually have not much of a chance at getting one of those big FA's. If the Bulls can get an experienced hire, by all means they should. Whether or not they do though is another story. If they can't, then they need a fully new front office. Paxson and Forman have essentially gambled their jobs on being able to land 1 of the big 3.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:18 AM) I absolutely understand the number of uninsured people will fall because of this law. But that's ALL this law accomplishes. It did nothing to curb the rising costs of medical care or prescription drugs. NOTHING. Also, insurance companies can STILL raise their premiums whenever and however they want. They simply cannot raise them excessively without justification. However, it's easy to justify that you need to raise them BECAUSE THE COST OF MEDICAL CARE AND DRUGS CONTINUED TO SKYROCKET. It's pretty simple. In the end, nothing was done. I like it when I can take other graphs from the same study. Overall, you cover 25 million+ people, and you increase overall spending by less than 1%/year, and that amount goes down with time.

Link

QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Apr 26, 2010 -> 08:07 PM) Once he loses some of his bat speed in the next couple of years this is going to not look like a good move. One interesting thing worth noting is that Howard has actually seemingly worked on getting better in a number of aspects of his game. Did you know that Pujols and Howard have basically the exact same K/PA rate so far this season? And that the fielding bible is saying that Howard's D has improved enough that he's up with Pujols at the top of the NL on that side of the ball?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 09:04 AM) Because hospitals/doctors can charge anything they want, anytime they want...and nothing was done to prevent this from happening now or in the future. Personally, I wouldn't go elsewhere for such a procedure, but then again, I'm insured...and since I was born, I've been insured. So, you're saying that if we were to provide insurance coverage for everyone...this problem might go away? I wonder why no one's held a 14 month debate on doing that recently.