NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 09:51 AM) [applause] We could do with a much smaller stimulus bill. If you want to start talking about passing a highway bill, a contrespectives bill, an NEA bill, a mass transit bill, etc, that is fine. Over half of this bill does not belong in the sentance with the word "stimulus". At best it is an omnibus spending bill. I agree. Break it up into its parts, vote on each on their own merits. I'ev seen plenty in that bill that is not at all a "stimulus". Which isn't to say its automatically bad - just that it is unrelated and adding spending that may not be necessary.

QUOTE (Steff @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 09:49 AM) I have all the software already so that's not an issue. Upping the other stuff is what I was wondering about. I would say average usage. She's not into games online or anything like that. Maybe a little music and uploading pictures from her digital camera, but nothing outrageous. If you already bought or have the software, that is a different story. Now, you want to see if you can even get the laptop up to spec for that software. Check the requirements in Processor speed and RAM for the OS and Office and other software you plan to load. Then check to see how much RAM you can even put on the machine if you want to. If that max RAM and current processor speed aren't significantly ABOVE* the requirements for the OS and Office and other software, then don't bother. If they clear it with room to spare, then go with the upgrade. * You don't want to go with bare min requirements for that stuff. If you do, the computer will be ungodly slow.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 09:39 AM) Y'all should know that zero house Republicans voted for this, for the record. I noticed that. Also, 11 Dems voted against. Not a great sign for Obama. It also means that the Senate bill, which will need to be more compromise-driven anyway due to the 60 rule, is more likely to be what ends up passing anyway. I also think it is interesting that the vote happened that way, after Obama's supposed efforts to work bi-partisan. What I'd like to know is, what happened. Did both parties sit down to try to hammer out a compromise and couldn't get one? Did one party or the other (or both) just stick to their guns and were unwilling to compromise? This will have major consequences to Obama's ability to work with the legislature.

QUOTE (hawksfan61 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 09:26 AM) Kapkomet may have more insight to this seeing as he has worked on the business side, but the impression I have been given is that the package aspect of their business is what makes them money, not letters. Bulk/Junk mail accounts for a significant source or their revenue, but that and letters alone will not allow them to ever turn a profit. They will forever be suckling at the teat of the federal government that way. I don't disagree that perhaps their advertising budget is excessive, but the point is up until recently they made money, even with that advertising budget. Of course with the economy the way it is now perhaps it is time for them to explore getting rid of some of that advertising, but I highly doubt you will ever see the post office get out of the package business. This sort of gets to my point. If the letter and junk mail businesses aren't making money, then they need to either cut services or increase prices. It should be that simple. The answer for a government agency should not be to spend extra money advertising and get into a space already serviced by multiple private entities. That should not be the role of a government agency, IMO. They shouldn't turn a profit anyway - they should be budget neutral, just as (IMO) many other government agencies that provide a specific service (i.e. Passport Office). They should charge what it costs to do that thing they do. I tend to be a big use-fee guy when it comes to government budgeting. I just think that is a better way for many agencies to operate.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 08:49 AM) It comes down to dictating the broadcast spectrum and not technology, right? Both.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 08:49 AM) But the industry asked for it. I don't see why that makes it any more logical. The industry asked the government to help them dictate terms to their customers? Makes no sense to me as to why that should work.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 08:46 AM) But public TV though? Isn't that where the government should be involved? Involved in general? Yes. There are things they need to do. Involved as in telling the industry what technologies to move to? No.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 08:45 AM) Wouldnt it be great if our elected officials voted how they think and what they feel is best for the people they serve rather than on how to best maintain their position in government? I know it wont ever happen, but it'd be nice Yes. But in this case, I was trying to illustrate that it was bad from either perspective. Bad for their election, bad for trying to represent their citizens. Its a no-win situation, whether they are honetly trying to vote for the right thing, or even just trying to save their own hides.

QUOTE (Steff @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 08:38 AM) I have an old Compaq Presario, it must be 10+ years old, that I'd like to bring into the 21st century to give to my neice. It's got Windows 98 on it and I think it still works (don't think it's been turned on in 7 years!). Would it be worth it to update it (vista, office 07, wireless connect, etc..) or should I just look into getting a new one? TIA, Steff By the time you buy a new OS, new Office software, and the necessary added RAM to run those things... and, this is assuming the processor is even strong enough to handle it... you will have spent more money than the cost of a decent new laptop. And the machine will be slower. I'd go new. You can get one pretty cheap. Companies like Dell, HP, Gateway, and others have some very good deals right now on laptops.

I actually feel pretty good about 3B. I think the chances of either Fields or Viciedo (or both) flourishing are very high, like 90%+. For that matter, I think that the chances are almost as good for Getz or Lillibridge (or both) to do well at 2B. The back end of the rotation is really the big scary monster with this team, IMO. Then to a lesser extent, CF, and then backup C. The rest of the team looks pretty solid to me.

I tend to agree with SS2K5 here. I don't think the government should be mandating this sort of thing, the market could handle this on its own. Or it wouldn't, and, there it would be. This is another waste of money. By the way, I am not saying the government shouldn't be involved in certain aspects of regulation of TV. Some of it is necessary. But dictating technology sets should not be part of that.

QUOTE (TheBigHurt @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 01:21 AM) I had no idea Ray Durham was available. Would it be such a crime to take a look at him? I mean, how much is he expected to make? Can he play CF? If not, I'd rather stick with Getz/Lillibridge at 2B, at this point in time.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 07:54 AM) It is a myth when something that isn't true is taken to make the arguement that something is true. I guess I could have called it a "lie" instead. Still not my point, I wasn't picking at the use of the word "myth". My point is, you basically said that the idea of tax cuts being bad was a "liberal myth". That is simply not the case.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 07:46 AM) When you take numbers out of context to make an arguement, it bothers me. I don't call it a leap of faith at all. My point is, you asserted that the idea of tax cuts not being good is a "liberal myth". That is the same as saying that GOP'ers see all tax cuts as good as part of their "conservative myth". Neither are myths - tax cuts have effect on the economy, but there are a lot of arguments one can make for or against them in various circumstances. They aren't myths.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 07:42 AM) To break it down to its most basic level, Israel's overwhelming (and I use that word loosely, because they don't work outside of the short term) responses aren't helping them any more than Hamas's rocket attacks are helping them. The solution to every problem from Israeli conservatives is "drop a few bombs, kill some more, that'll show em." That works when you're fighting the military of another country, but who's the opposing country, and who's the opposing military here? Watching Hamas and the Israeli military, I get a picture in my head of two dudes standing on either side of a brick wall, both banging their heads against it periodically and acting surprised the wall is still there and they have headaches.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 07:21 AM) Because they don't count a job saved as a change in GDP, because technically it isn't a "change". It keeps the status quo. The change actually occurs when there is no change, and they have to layoff employees to keep the company afloat. You don't count no change, as a change, that's why these numbers are so low. Its a statistical anomaly that is fairly clear and understood. People take these numbers out of context and have no idea what the actually mean. That's why the whole liberal myth of taxcuts not working keeps getting proliferated. First sentence, agree. Second sentence, you made a huge leap there. There are many good reasons to argue against certain tax cuts being useful, depending on their implementation. Its not all just some myth.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 02:05 AM) The USPS is not feasible, thats why the government funds it the way they do. It's really no different than Amtrak. The USPS is very feasible if it uses a pricing structure to match its costs. And if fewer people use it at higher costs, that means they are finding more efficient ways to do things, which is better anyway. Amtrak has some similarities, but also some major differences. One major difference you need to think about is that there is no offset cost for lack of use. If fewer people send letters, and fewer businesses send out annoying flyers that no one reads, who loses? The only thing I can see is a few less people working for the USPS. But SOME of that business will go elsewhere, in some other way, and put the money into private business, which is actually an improvement. With Amtrak, if it dies or shrinks back, people will take cars most of the time instead. More money for the oil companies and convenience stores, yes. But also much worse traffic and pollution, which costs us all money. Plus a car is far less cost-efficient by nature, so the people who switched are losing money too.

I think some people missed my point about the USPS. First, for SOME of its business, it is absolutely a monopoly. Obviously, if you are talking about shipping packages of some significant size, or express services, they have competition. For letter mail, there is zero real competition. And for BOTH those scenarios, it makes no sense for the USPS to advertise, or to run up budget shortfalls. None. In the letter mail (and junk mail - its biggest business) categories, if the costs doesn't cover their costs, then you raise the cost. That simple. In the express or package areas, since there are multiple private competitors, there is no reason for USPS to even exist in that space. So either way, them spending money on advertising, and running up budget holes, is just a waste of money. And by the way, I didn't say (I don't think) that the USPS was bloated. In fact, I specifically didn't get into the efficiency issue, as I know nothing about that at USPS. I said that their pricing should be set to match up with its operating costs, and that its operating costs should not include advertising. I stand by my sentiment here. The USPS advertising budget is 100% waste, their pricing needs to match operational costs per task, and they need to get away from the mentality of competing in multi-private entity spaces.

The argument over this stimulus bill as good and bad is an exact illustration of what we were discussing earlier - blanket bills are bad. Put yourself in the position of a House Rep, from whatever party and district you are affiliated with. You see this bill, which does some good things, and some bad things. What do you do? If you vote for it, a GOP rival will eat you alive later for having spent such ridiculous sums of money, some of which was utter trash. If you vote against it, a future Dem rival will eat you alive because you chose to let the economy get worse, so that you could make a political point. There is no winner. Its bad legislation, even if its is motivated by an attempt at good deeds.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 28, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) That's still very measley. As a percentage of this bill, it sure is. Actually, as a percentage of what is needed to get the infrastructure upgraded enough to get substantially more people to use it... it is as well.

You want to cut some government waste? Here is a target rich environment - the Postal Service. The mail has basically no competition, and should be run at cost. Plain and simple. And yet, this agency actually spends all kinds of money on advertising. Seriously - they spend 9 figures a year on advertising. That is 100% waste, right there. And this year, the USPS may need to cut back service because they are so deep in the hole. The provision of necessary government services should charge what they cost - not more, not less. Its really damn simple. If they can't make their expectations, then raise the prices. If fewer people use it... GOOD. That is less money going to a government agency, and probably some of it goes to other areas of the private sector.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jan 28, 2009 -> 12:41 PM) I find if amazing that people still believe Scott Boras and his annual glowing offseason reports. All of his clients are 100% healthy and ready to have breakout 2009 seasons! I guess you're willing to believe the lies of a scumbag like Boras when he represents a f***ing deity like Joe Crede. I guess Boras' scheme to keep Crede off the field for the remainder of the 2008 season is working on some people. He's a 31 year old broken down shell of a formerly good baseball player. It's time to move on and finally find some stability at a position that's been in turmoil since the end of the 2006 season. From what I have read, a couple of Boras' clients, including Crede, haven't signed because Boras wants multiple years, and teams want just one. Especially for a high risk case like Crede. This is a situation where having Boras as your agent could backfire really, really badly. Some of these guys may end up not playing major league baseball in 2009 because of it. The economy is effecting these teams, and many will simply walk away from the table.

QUOTE (Steff @ Jan 28, 2009 -> 02:43 PM) They are fantastic and surprisingly save a bunch of $$. I'm forced to make a list of things I need so that iliminates that impluse money wasting buying. And like BS says the produce is awesome because they get to pick from the stuff not yet on the grocery floor that hasn't been touched by others. A lot of times they have better deals also. Almost always on staple items like milk, bread, and eggs. Their ground chuck is also a few cents per lb cheaper, too. Add me to the Peapod fans list. We do it weekly now especially, during the winter and with the new baby around.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 28, 2009 -> 02:59 PM) For the record, I'm pretty sure it wasn't Fitzgerald's intention to arrest him before Blago did anything, but the Tribune forced his hand. I think it was a combination, or at least that is my impression. They wanted to move fast to stop further actions in general, but, not as fast as they had to.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 28, 2009 -> 12:29 PM) From testimony given before the Small Business Committee last summer. For every dollar you cut in corporate taxes, you get $.30 back as GDP gain. For every dollar you cut in the payroll tax, you get $1.29 back, because of how regressive that tax is. For programs that actually create jobs, it keeps going up. Corporate tax cuts have among the lowest multipliers out there. The money just winds up either horded or in the hands of the shareholders who receive the largest amount of dividends, aka the people who don't spend the extra money if its given to them. Very interesting.