NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:45 PM) Well the dealer and the driver's manual are playing for the same team. Ask the oil change guy. Well, the oil change guy has a motivation to have you change the oil more often too, doesn't he? Besides, the dealers make some money off that regular maintenance too. They'll err on the side of too much. So I figure, if the dealer and manual say 10k, that's probably pretty safe.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 08:53 PM) For me, I think that GWB was right in policy a lot of the time, even including Iraq. But the handling of the way a) things were presented, and b.) the aftermath of the war, and c) the overall communicative direction he has given, especially in the second term, has been horrendous. Immigration, he was wrong on. The economic factors for the most part he's done well, the housing crap the exception, but I don't think he has a lot of power to effect that. Anytime that taxes have been cut it's given the government more overall revenue, war spending aside. You also have to remember that the war spending was one of the things that gave the economy a boost the first time anyway, right wrong or indifferent. The worst part of Bush is the allowance of Republicans, on his watch, to spend like Democrats. That is my biggest beef is the fiscal irresponsibility. Bush's policy record on the environment has been horrifically bad.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:40 PM) Toronto...ok, nicest...people...anywhere. Like the Chicago of Canada. Or is Chicago the Toronto of the US? I'd contend that nicest people anywhere = Iowa. Not really a city though. A bunch of small towns. But I've never been anywhere so friendly.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:21 PM) The "good" candidates don't have a chance. Pretty much unless you are out there slinging mud, you get tore apart or ignored completely. Yeah, that's pretty much true. But I'd contend that is only partially their fault. Part of the blame for that lies with the media and their lack of focus, as well as a population in this country that is blissfully ignorant of the political process. Those factors encourage the sound byte culture we see and hear.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:36 PM) Well, I'm sure those are factors that go into the equation. But there is a major issue when the dealers are telling us 10k miles and the oil people are telling us their best synthetics can only go 6k miles. That's a real problem. In this case, both the dealer AND the driver's manual say 3k, then 10k. But I suppose part of that may be the fact that this is a hybrid - the gas engine only runs some of the time.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:34 PM) Well, I wouldn't say it so bluntly, but he's absolutely correct. I would advise a person to buy themselves a new car once in their life, just to feel what it is like to have a vehicle that has never been driven by anyone else before. But then, never buy another new car again! They are such an absolute ripoff. I have never understood why someone would pay $17 k for a Ford Focus when they could go buy a really, really nice used car, 1-2 years old, with very little mileage on it. As long as you do your research with the accident reports and such, there is nothing to be concerned about when buying a used vehicle. I don't believe I'll ever buy new again....(unless I become filthy rich, of course... There is always one problem with buying a recent used car... why was it sold? You've got to wonder why someone buys a brand new car, which loses 30%+ of its value in the first year, and then sells it or trades it in. Sure, some people just buy a new car every year because they have money to burn, but think about the other more likely scenarios... they all point to a car that probably had problems of some kind or another. That's the big issue with buying used - you are taking a chance (a significant one if the car is only a year old) that the car is problematic.

Anyone been to New Zealand? I'll be there for a couple weeks in Feb, all over the south island. I'm curious of people's impressions.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:02 PM) You would be surprised by how many people stretch that oil change to 10,000 miles, never look at Trans fluid, check their coolent unless the heater doesn't blow, etc. Even the fuel level. Not many people realize that the fuel pump in most cars is cooled by the gas in the tank. When you dip below 1/4 tank in many cars, the pump runs hotter. It's a little thing that may never cause a problem, but why risk it on a routine basis? On many new cars, actually, 10k is now the normal interval. On our hybrid for example, they recommend doing one at the first 3000, then only going every 10000 after that.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 12:09 PM) I did not mean to imply that. It may take two or three more elections. It all runs in cycles. Kind of the same old stuff, more of the same, a little more of the same, damn I'm tired of that and go 180 the other way. This election cycle has more good candidates than any I've seen in a few cycles. Unfortunately, everyone seems to be forgetting that, because Clinton and Romney (the current front-runners) are among the worst of each bunch. But the overall field is an improvement.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 08:44 PM) I got a rock... (Well, that and I got a much more useful poll of the prize, California:) Funny thing about that poll by Field... it used 377 LV - a smaller number than most other state polls we see, and in a much larger state. Tough to make 377 people statistically representative with a state as gigantic in population and geography as CA. On the other hand, a poll with 897 LV was conducted during the same period, showing Clinton's lead to be only 5 points.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 11:52 AM) And IIRC their fleet is quite a bit newer then the rest. Newer fleet of Airbus A319/20/21 planes along with a set of Embraer regional jets. They only have 2 species of plane, to cut maintenance costs. And in general, their contuniung costs for labor and other factors are lower than other airlines because they didn't come into the industry encumbered by a lot of the parasitic cost elements the traditional airlines had (and to a certain degree still have).

To live in, or visit? --To live in, Chicago is still my number one. --If I had to move to another US city, tops on my list would be: --Denver/Boulder --Albuquerque --Washington, DC --Phoenix/Tucson --Outside the US, fave cities: --London --Frankfurt --Dublin --As a weird list, cities that are fun to visit but you don't want to live in... --Las Vegas --New Orleans --Memphis

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 09:25 AM) Rule #1 of all trading, only risk what you are able to lose. If you will miss the money if JBLU goes bankrupt, don't do it. Are their financials that bad? I didn't look.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 09:25 AM) With the hybrids, you really need to look on a case-by-case basis. Some hybrids are great. Others cost thousands more and get maybe 1 or 2 mpg more, or, in some rare cases, are even worse overall. Also, the older EPA testing methods favored hybrid engines and gave them artificially inflated MPG. They have a new system now, but I don't know if 2008 cars are rated on it. 1. The new MPG ratings start with 2008 models. I used them in my math. The old ratings favored ALL cars - they were unrealistic for current driving conditions. 2. Absolutely right about case-by-case - and some hybrids, like the VUE Green Line, are just "light" hybrids that only get a little improvement. 3. I don't know where you are seeing any that get only the same or worse mpg though - that would be news to me.

Sounds to me like KW is shopping MacD - which I think is a good idea.

This offseason has been pretty good so far. If they can deal Uribe, Crede and MacD, and pick up an SP, then I'll be very psyched for 2008.

OK I couldn't link to it, but, here is the post (note that your math may be different, but you can plug in your numbers to get a result)...

You may want to consider a hybrid as well (Toyota and Honda make hybrids in your car/price range). I posted a while back in the Buster the math I did on payback period for the added cost, and with federal and state tax credits, the period has shrunk dramatically. For me, it was only about a year. I'll see if I can find the post and link to it.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 08:49 AM) Two comments here. 1- I've dealt with Lufthansa people personally back in the day when I was in the airline industry. They wouldn't have invested if they didn't want to do something with it. 2- Having said that, JetBlue or ANY airline is a huge risk in this environment. They may merge with someone, which would add value at that time. Remember, they took a huge hit when they had their Valentine's Day fiasco last year and are still paying for it. By the way, speaking of airline mergers, here are two official NSS72 predictions for the industry... 1. Frontier and AirTran will begin merger talks, representing the first major merger among the "new kids". Their businesses are just too perfect a pairing. They already have some sharing agreements. 2. At least one of the second tier hub airlines - Delta, Northwest, Continental, US Airways - will merge with another from the same group. Its just hard to say which one(s) will be involved.

Despite that I don't like Bill Clinton much, he was indeed a pretty good President. More so in hindsight even. And the economy, as Bush 1 once rightly (but politically stupidly) pointed out is not something a President can do a whole lot with. That said, Clinton and Congress did manage to do a lot of good with the tools they had during that period. QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 02:56 AM) That being said, he cheapens his Presidency every time he attacks Barack Obama. But that is very true. He's starting to degrade his own legacy. In answer to the poll's question, I think as others have said, it both helps and hurts. The Clintons are the old guard, as I mentioned in another thread - and they have a death grip on their slowly diminishing (but still very significant) power.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 02:51 AM) By the way, on individual stocks.... does anyone else think JetBlue is currently a steal at 4.70 a share? I'm no economist and I know that airline stocks are generally not good performers... but Lufthansa just dumped 750 million into the airline for 19% and I wouldn't think that would happen for a short term deal. JetBlue will probably be the first US non-core airline to start intercontinental flights. I just don't see Southwest, AirTran, Frontier or Midwest Express doing it. And that market is very lucrative. So yeah, I'd say that might be a good bet. But I don't know JetBlue's financials right now either.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 03:02 AM) Hillary Clinton IS the Dem establishment. If you want to say that Bill Clinton is out of the party mainstream, you're out of your gourd. The truth is that Howard Dean is representative of the next generation of the party, and Obama is pretty clearly that wing's candidate. Firm believers in the 50 state strategy, and he may paint himself as a moderate, he's only doing so by being inclusive and not parsing words when it comes to policy. Bill Clinton was, and to a certain extent is, that establishment's biggest pillar. But that doesn't change the fact that plenty of "establishment" folks are not endorsing Hillary (either because they endorsed Obama, or are waiting it out). That says volumes to me. The Clintons are becoming dinosaurs. That is why I said that Hillary Clinton is not the same as establishment. She's old guard no doubt - but she isn't the cross-spectrum favorite in the party.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 10:44 PM) And my point is...most of them are uncommitted for a reason at this point, because they don't want to get caught backing the one who loses. But once the votes are in, you will see a landslide of them towards whichever one wins that Tuesday and the succeeding days. If there's a clear winner on that day, even with just a plurality, there will be a landslide, especially for Hillary as the establishment person. And the states like Iowa and Nevada who haven't yet fully committed will commit for the person in the lead after that day to fill in the gaps. If Hillary pulls out a solid win in CA, then it's over unless BO sweeps pretty much every other state other than NY. If after Super Tuesday its pretty close, then there will not be any landslide of supers. That only happens if there is a far and away clear leader.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 09:29 PM) I just for the life of me can't imagine that there's any way an establishment candidate at 40-45% in delegates would lose at a convention where 1/5 of the delegates are superdelegates. The fact is, if Clinton wins the plurality of the votes on Super Tuesday and the remaining primaries, enough superdelegates will hop over to her side to push her to 50+1. And if not, then states like Nevada where the delegates aren't written in stone yet will fill in the blanks. If there's a clear leader in delegates after super tuesday, they'll win on the first ballot at the convention if it even gets close to that far. You keep making that same leap - that Clinton = Superdelegates. Except, look around - since Iowa, more and more establishment folks are distancing themselves from Hillary. I'm not saying that Obama is is going to get most of them either - I'm saying there is nothing at all automatic about them going to Clinton.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 09:21 PM) Even if it works against her...it's not working 10% in the polling data against her in California. It doesn't have to. This is what I don't get with everyone's view on this - people seem to be ignoring Edwards' presence in the election. For EITHER Clinton or Obama, all they have to do to be alive in Denver is make sure the other doesn't get 50%. And as long as Edwards is still pulling his 15% (which he has been, other than the NV caucus), then its pretty likely that neither will make that 50% level. Therefore, this race is nowhere near over. All these little things - debates, single state wins... have effect of course. But there is soooo much left to go. And frankly, I don't think the Dem establishment is behind Clinton anyway, for lots of reasons (her high negs and vulnerability in a national election for one). Now, if Edwards drops out before Denver and backs Clinton, then I agree - its over.