Balta1701

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 01:25 PM) The biggest problem I see is that back in the 60's, I believe, they took the social security funds, which were at a surplus, and put those into the general funds. Um, they're basically still doing exactly that. Social Security will be running a surplus until roughly 2017 give or take a year or two. Right now, that surplus is being used to purchase bonds from the General fund. But because this is the government buying bonds from itself...it doesn't count in the total "National Debt" or yearly deficit totals or whatever you want to call them. Those bonds make up the Social Security Trust Fund...basically a big pile of U.S. government debt that is held by the Social Security Administration. So every extra dollar right now which has come into the government through Social Security taxes has in fact been spent by the general fund. There are just papers saying that the general fund will pay them back when the balance moves to the other side. The whole idea of a "Lockbox" was to have the government stop spending the extra SS dollars in the general fund and instead hold onto that money to try to make the hit on the general fund easier when the baby boom retirement does hit in full force.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 01:26 PM) That a church is like a family--and that it should be handled internally because it's really no one else's business. Not a compelling argument. So if my brother were to mysteriously disappear...it's no one else's business? Hmm...Jerry...time for you to panic!

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 01:20 PM) Israel should have taken out Iranian facilities a long time ago. When the proper intelligence became availble, they just should have circumvented the entire sanctions/negotiations practice and forcibly destroyed Iran's capabilities. Who cares about criticism? The entire Middle East, in addition almost the entire planet, could care less about Israel as it is. Better than looking over your shoulder at some f***ing lunactic promoting your annihilation. As far as I know...the proper intelligence probably still isn't available. We've never found any cite at which Iran has enriched uranium beyond what is necessary for electricity production. Had anyone known of a site where they were doing so...feeding that intel to the IAEA would put Iran at a horrible disadvantage. That even assumes of course that it would be possible for Israel to actually pull off the strike, given that Iran seems to have built their program in a dispersed manner with buildings made as strongly as they could in order to protect against an Israeli strike.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) I feel the same way, but a Catholic friend said that she felt it should be handled by the church hierarchy. And I wondered if anyone else shared that. . . So what was her argument? That the separation of church and state in the constitution implies that the U.S. and its states can't police the church, but that the churches should be treated as their own state-like entities?

QUOTE(WCSox @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 01:08 PM) I have little doubt that building U.S.-friendly coalition in the bordering country to Iran was always part of the plan. The CIA has known about their nuclear ambitions for a long time. Say what you want about oil, but a nation that is CLEARLY trying to build nuclear weapons and has publically called for the destruction of Israel needs to be stopped. I'm hoping that sanctions will work and that it won't come to an armed conflict, but we're dealing with a head of state that's a complete lunatic. Which is why it would have been nice to still have an army available which could at least make a credible threat towards Iran, in the way that our buildup in Kuwait forced Saddam to allow the UNMOVIC team into Iraq to verify that he was in fact WMD Disarmed in early 2003. It would have been very nice to be able to sit there in Kuwait and say "Iran...stop this immediately or it will mean war". Right now, we can say "Iran, stop this immediately or we'll put sanctions on you, but not so many sanctions that you'll stop selling oil or so many that you'll really notice them." One of those is going to be more effective than the other.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 12:43 PM) Is it illegal to blackmail someone for their vote? Well...with this Congress...

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 12:36 PM) I want to keep my money also, can I do that too? Only if many others don't get to keep their money. You know, I'm fairly sad I missed the SS discussions that I'm sure went on around here last year before I joined. I bet those were entertaining.

And yeah...those troops in Iraq aren't doing anything right now. They're just having a happy vacation sitting next to their tanks. All of their equipment is in prime condition, and they're very well rested. If needed to, they could easily jump across the border, conquer Iran, and have yet another nation throw flowers on us and give us oil.

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 11:23 AM) It's our scheduled Sunday night viewing...EVERY Sunday night. Same here, although I'll readily admit I usually laugh a lot more at Family Guy. (You shot me in both knees and set me on fire.)

Personally, if you ask me about our bench, I'm just happy that we've upgraded the abilities of the people on it. Mack, Ozuna, Borch >> Ozuna, Harris, Perez. Just having better guys when Ozzie plays the infamous "Sunday Lineup" will probably win us a few more games. Especially considering how often Ozzie plays his backups.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 07:19 AM) Dont froget Jenks has screws holding his arm together, there is no telling if that will hold up. The good bit of news is that screw was put in his arm while he was starting, throwing a lot more pitches, and throwing a wider variety of pitches than he's throwing now. Lately he's been doing 1-2 innings of mostly fastballs, curves, and maybe the occasional change. I believe in ANA's minor leagues he was also throwing some sliders, and was starting, both of which may very well have put more stress on his arm. But yeah, it's there. Hopefully they did some good work with it and it'll hold up.

Here's my question. Phoenix is playing much better defense this year to go along with their running game. If they get Amare back...that should improve their offense even more. We've already seen Detroit take down San Antonio...can Phoenix give detroit problems?

QUOTE(Balance @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 08:17 AM) I'm puzzled why all there's still all these right-wing attacks against Clinton. The man's been out of office for 5 years. Maybe the best response is to revisit some of the misdeeds of the Nixon administration. It's as relevant. Probably because his wife is still a Senator, and may be running for higher office in 2 years?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 1, 2006 -> 08:05 AM) Clinton started in a much deeper recession and 29 million jobs were created under his watch. Not that either person was responsible for any job not directly related to the federal government. Well...in that case...it's also interesting to note that some studies suggest that without job creation due to government growth, we would still be at a lower total number of jobs than we were in Jan 2001. Link. At least according to that source's data...increased government spending has accounted for more than 100% of the jobs created since Bush took office.

(Posted mainly because I thought it was funny)

Some things of note based on reading the speech: Ok, so the President wants to protect us from animal/human hybrids? Something tells me we shouldnt' be letting this man watch Spiderman movies. Whoever wrote this line is going to be fired: (Insert loud applause by Democrats)

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 08:17 PM) I hate getting into political discussions but I am going to jump in and ask for opinions. Let me preface this by saying I have a basic understanding of economics and government, but I am not one to debate its finer points. So I will up front say, please do not try to call me out, rather help educate me. My question to you Tex is this... Why does it matter? The federal government is not like an individual's household budget. Why should I or anyone else care if the government is billions in "debt"? Does that debet actually ever get paid off? If the budget is balanced, does it really have any effect on my life or yours? Do you really think a government like ours carrying a large debt will actually cause its economy to fail? We have thrived in times with huge debts. I had an economics professor in college that stated matter of factly that the National Debt didn't mean a hill of beans. I can't argue that he is correct, but I can ask the questions. I'd be interested in yours and others thoughts. The national debt matters for multiple reasons. First and foremost, the national debt matters because the national debt is like a credit card. Every dollar you spend that you can't pay for today costs you much more than $1 in the future, because you have to pay interest on that dollar. When you're shopping around, if you're a wise fiscal planner...what items do you buy on credit? Probably a car, a house, and maybe an occasional appliance. Do you go and blow your entire credit limit at Macy's? No, of course not. Why not? Because the only reason why a smart financial planner would spend money on credit is if it was something he or she would not be able to pay for with cash, and which he cannot make any choice about having (i.e. You can't live in a box, and if you rent a place you build up no equity, etc.) Secondly, the national debt is also important in that it is capable of driving inflation. Basically, what the government is doing when it increases the debt is pumping out money. It is pumping money into the economy with a guarantee of repaying it at some point. But that always raises the possibility, as happened in the 70's...that you'll pump too much cash into the economy, thus driving down the value of your currency and leading, in the end, to that nasty "Stagflation" cycle where prices of goods drop but consumers don't buy because they expect the prices to drop farther relative to the inflating dollar, etc. Lots more theory behind that than i can explain in 1 paragraph. Third, the debt is a security risk. Right now, a significant number of our dollars are held by foreign banks and creditors, such as our good friends in China and the Arab oil-countries. This has happened because those nations have had extra money to invest, and have been willing to prop up the U.S. economy by buying U.S. treasury dollars. First, there is no guarantee that at somem point, they will not cut back their willingness to purchase those T-bills (thus forcing the Fed to raise interest rates to prevent inflation), or in the event of a political dispute...decide to sell some of them and actually do severe damage to the U.S. economy by deflating the dollar. Thus far this hasn't happened...but we're gambling an awful lot on the willingness of the Chinese to continue buying those T-bills right now. Oh, and 1 more...the debt is stupid especially right now because we can see large expenses on the horizon...Social Security and Medicare expenses related to the baby-boom retirement. This would be like having a balloon payment on your mortgage coming up, but again, deciding to max out your credit card the month beforehand. Yes, you can get through, but if something goes wrong (i.e. an oil price spike or terror attack) suddenly you're caught being unable to pay either, and you're literally bankrupt.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 07:54 PM) Interesting flash poll from CBS. 700 Watchers approved of the speech 77-23. However only 32 percent of those watchers thought that those goals would be accomplished. The numbers in the SOTU flash polls are always like that...mainly because the "SOTU speech watchers" is a VERY biased sample set. Last year...the same numbers came up...over 70% approval of the speech among watchers. Bush's average approval rating among the non-watchers last year? About 45%...and that was before his polls went into the toilet. The people who like him watch. The people who don't like hiim don't watch.

The Buffalo Bills have hired Bears' Defensive Backs coach Perry Fewell to be the coordinator of their new "Lollapalooza" defense. (only 2 letters off!)

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 03:43 PM) What's your reasoning? Is there a technical point being hit, or do you mean Bush's speech is going to rattle the markets? There certainly are some fiscally huge things he plans to discuss - health insurance, oil, etc. Google.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 02:46 PM) pssst, thats two letters changed pssst, thats two betters changed

Oh, and by the way...I think tomorrow looks like it may well be a very very bad day for the stock market.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 02:30 PM) Executives know what other executives make. The market pressure is more important in this case, I think. Boards want to make money. That will override any pressure that any single CEO candidate might bring. Boards are all about stock performance. This won't be a fix-all, but it will likely have a significant positive effect. I think you'd be surprised how much cronyism there actually can be on those boards. Several companies have definately been more about enriching each other than about stock price over the last few years. That's the only way some of those gigantic severance bonus packages could have come about.

That's not a crime, he wasn't lying about sex!