Balta1701

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 12:19 PM) Wise started 2 in a row for Pods in Detroit after the Perfecto... That was a game off, not a day off.

Was Kotsay in the big leagues for the Red Sox? So we'll need to clear a 25 man spot for him?

So in other words...even if our sandwich pick busts...there's still a lot of hope for this draft. Sweet.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 11:49 AM) I would LOVE to have Crawford, but I believe he is almost a FA (this year or next?), which would deter me a bit. 2011 offseason. 1.5 years remaining.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 11:47 AM) That is pretty much how I saw things. If either of the two gets off of their high horse for a minute and tries to understand the other person, this never happens. Which is exactly where some of us think the racial component winds up coming in to this.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 10:06 AM) there is nitpicking facetious arguments, and then there is Balta It's what I do.

QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:56 AM) However, just for fun, let's say the guy had reached way over and made the catch. What would you be thinking right now? My God, this man has 9 foot arms and the Bulls have a couple open roster spots.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:49 AM) First, money is not money, in the housing market - liquidity is a key factor here, and increasing liquidity in the market, itself, creates more equity and higher prices. And this idea that the housing market is continuing to crater is both an argument FOR doing what I suggested, and also missing the recent months' trends that all show otherwise. Here's my problem with that. The only way it works is if the govenrment buys up the surplus housing and then demolishes it. Basically, my contention is that housing prices are going to fall back to equlibrium, or possibly even past it thanks to overconstruction. For the past 10 years, people have been able to buy more expensive houses because the value of their housing has gone up. If the value of their housing isn't going up, then they can only buy the level of housing that they actually can afford based on their income. No one in areas like L.A., Vegas, Phoenix can afford the housing prices out here. If the government pumps in money, then all that is going to happen is the government is going to take the loss, because the housing prices are going to fall back to the point where people can actually afford to buy housing. Higher prices here are actually the enemy...the only thing that supported higher prices was the presence of a bubble, and those higher prices are going to go back to normal. The only difference would be the government would be taking the loss...except the government is already taking the loss anyway (hi AIG!).

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:49 AM) I think you are off on a few things here. First, the federal government only owns a small % of land in this country, so the idea that the gov't already owns anything valuable or puts mines out of business is patently false. Here's some actual numbers to back me up. The Forest service alone owns 8% of the land in this country. The share held by BLM is larger but I don't have time to calculate through it all. It's something like 1/4 of the country that's held publicly, at least. Maybe more. Throw in some national parks land while you're at it.

Long Billy Beane article in ESPN. Kenny Williams reference included:

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:38 AM) Yeah, most people that commit murders think this way. And they dont Let's specify here...by "Most", you mean "61%" based on the most recent data. 39% of murders in 2007 went without convictions. And probably a fair number of those were wrongful convictions, based on the overturn rate we see these days. He's got a legit shot.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:35 AM) Cioli, Shoemaker, Colligan, Collop, Serafin, Bellamy It's hard to get too high or down on any of these kids after 100 at bats / 4-5 pitching appearances though. I know that, I'm not asking for the final opinion here, I'm just trying to get you guys to sell me on the guys we picked other than Phegley, and I'd say you've successfully done that.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:29 AM) Being able to refuse it for an alternative if you can afford it is a nice option to have. Having no other option, as far as I'm concerned, isn't an option at all. Medicare couldn't be run WORSE than it is, so let's not even discuss it like it's something great. Medicare could be run better (See specifically the proposal to take away Congress's power to set reimbursement rates) but it does a darn good job at what it does; keeping the elderly out of poverty. Its administrative costs are significantly lower than any private plan because they don't spend so much money finding reasons not to treat people. Its satisfaction ratings are dramatically higher than private insurance. About the only system in this country that genuinely works better is the VA system, which even Bill Kristol admits is about as good as you can get.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:11 AM) When's your date set for? Haven't set yet, but knocking on the door of the last experiment after last week.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:05 AM) You buy different land for different purposes, as noted. Let me be more specific...the types of land that the government would buy up that would benefit the nation in any way...either the government already owns, or by buying it, the government would be putting mining companies out of business (i.e. they'd be buying back tracts of land sold to mining/energy companies at other times). The only way the government would have made a dent in the collapse would have been to have the government step in and waste all its money buying up bad housing units to reinflate the bubble. The problem with that idea is...the amount of wealth that has evaporated in the housing market is on the order of $8 trillion, give or take where we currently are. Pumping in $1 trillion means that the government makes a handful of very "lucky" people happy when it buys up their failed housing tract, then the market continues to crater and the government's investment is completely lost.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 09:06 AM) Not really. Because the concern seems to be focused on the performance of one guy... Phegley. Ok, then aside from Mitchell, who did we draft who has impressed so far?

So, can anyone actually say that this team shouldn't have a guy or two getting in the face of the people who are costing us games?

MARK!

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 04:46 AM) No offense, maggs. But that's a ridiculous comment right there. The draft wasn't even 50 days ago. I'd say its just a little early to say this draft looks weak. Can we rephrase it and say that aside from Mitchell, there seems to be reason to be concerned about the college level guys we drafted and their performance in our system?

Defend.

Isn't a big problem with this idea that the government already owns tons and tons of land? And people (i.e. Harry Reid's family, oil companies, and other mining companies) keep finding ways to convince the government to develop or give them that land at a huge discount? Basically you'd need the government to go start buying up failing housing. You don't get much in the way of resources if you have the government buy up vacant subdivisions outside of Orange County and Las Vegas.

William Shatner reads Sarah Palin's speech, via the Tonight Show.

Beckham saw four pitches! What a player!

Let's go Gordon!

2 pitches...yeesh...