southsider2k5

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 07:28 AM) It almost seemed as if they were shaving points. The delay of game penalties were very very strange. When you have guys who have in the game for 5/6 decades saying that they have never seen that before...

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 10:01 AM) Rizzo wasn't so good when he was promoted either. I would be happy with Reed as a 3rd piece Look no further than our most recent manager and his 0-41 to start his career.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 09:55 AM) Ah, did not know that. The industry I work in is similar to that in some ways (nuclear), though I would argue that at least in that case it's for a very, very good reason. I guess my advice to everyone is to listen to John Bogle; invest in low-cost index funds like those offered by Vanguard or Fidelity. My main retirement stock investments are always low cost index funds.

Perfect example from experience. I spent most of my time working on order desks. For any order which could not be placed by computer and time stamped in that manner, we would write an order by hand on to an order form. Regulations require that each order got three time stamps. One when taken, one when confirmed, and one when placed with the floor. Because of that FINRA has rules in place requiring the regular checking of the time clocks to ensure they are within such and such time of the actual time it is. Because of that rule we had to keep a log that proved that at least once per shift that someone checked all of the time clocks on the order desk, and which ones were changed, by how much, if they were inaccurate. We had to note if a specific time clock was inoperable and who was informed about it. The burden was not that FINRA could walk in the door at any time and check our clocks. It was that we had to prove that our clocks were in compliance the whole time.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 09:43 AM) Aren't there already forms of 'fiduciary duty' rather than 'suitable' that are enforced in the industry through industry-adopted standards? And how is the 'suitable' standard enforced? I thought CFP's were already held to the fiduciary standard? I'm obviously not nearly as familiar with this stuff as you guys, but I'd imagine that the enforcement would be along the lines of say wage discrimination. It's something that would have to be shown retroactively in a large group of people rather than zeroing in on a specific individual client being steered toward a higher commission product. No. I actually spent time in examinations and enforcement. The regulatory structure of financial products is nothing like this. You quite literally have to be able to prove you are obeying the rules. Even not being able to prove that is against the rules for the people in charge. You have to have a well detailed system of showing how you are following the rules, and have a system of proof in place to show how you are doing it. The detail that goes into these logs already is expensive and onerous. You get fined for not having logs to prove whatever rule is being talked about. Again the burden here would be that advisors would have to be able to prove that with every single customer interaction in an advisory role that they acted in the best interest of the customer, and NOT that FINRA would have to prove they didn't. That is not how financial regulation works. It is exactly why it is so damned expensive for compliance in this sector.

QUOTE (pablo @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 09:31 AM) Reed is quite possibly nothing more than a 4th piece to an Q deal. I'd view him in the same way as Joey Gallo, which is basically a lottery ticket. Tucker, Perez, Fisher, Laureano/Stubbs/Reed is the deal I would take. Reed and Gallo only have their power in common. I get he bombed in his debut, but Reed has 243 K's in 1203 MiLB PA's. With Gallo you are talking about someone who had over 700 K's in 1700 ABs. In order for Reed to match him he would need to go to the minors and essentially strike out in 500 straight at bats. Reed also averaged 60 points higher BA, and about 35 points higher in OBP. Reed is much more of a professional hitter than Gallo ever will be.

QUOTE (striker @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 09:24 AM) If the Rays turned down Martes, Tucker, Paulino, +2 prospects for Archer, then that would be my starting point for Quintana, except I don't want Paulino. I listened to the TalkingStros podcast with Jim Callis. Callis called Quintana underated one moment, then called him a solid #3 another. And his job is to evaluate players for a living. The host suggested Fisher, Paulino, Moran and the #75 pick. Q would out perform that. I'd lose my mind if the White Sox made that deal.

QUOTE (juddling @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 03:10 AM) I know there was a few of us here who watched Vikings...I have to ask...... I will admit the only interest I had was to see how they took care of that situation. Now it will be interesting how they pick up those pieces going forward. I mean I get that is the history here, so you really couldn't change that part, but at the same time, he is the center of the show until now.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 09:31 AM) Fair enough, and that's a heck of a lot better of an explanation than "people should be free to be gouged on commissions and fees they might not understand!" the administration has put forward. Yeah, honestly I don't really care what the Trump admin has to say about it, but the rule was going to be a disaster. Think about it, how do you prove with every single customer interaction that was taken in an advisory role that you acted in the customers best interest, because that is the regulatory burden here.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:10 PM) Thankfully they have this wonderful tool called google in the 21st century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...hutdown_of_2013 QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:12 PM) Way to ignore all the times they passed on that idea. Are there any intellectually honest liberals? Any? QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 07:38 AM) Provide one post where I said that, else I would suggest you change your handle. Too easy.

QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 07:39 AM) You are clueless. Conservative but clueless. It's not why I post here. The only thing that is clueless is trying to rationalize that the GOP didn't try to obstruct Obama. Don't that person who tries to justify everything that your party does. Don't be a drone. Use your mind and see past the marching orders.

Having been to the most recent FINRA conference last year this rule was a big topic of discussion. FINRA basically said that Congress had no discussion with them about this rule, what it meant, and how to enforce it. It was a gigantic clusterf***. I understand the idea of what they were wanting to do here, but they basically put together an unrealistic and more importantly an unenforceable jumble of legalese to paper. It was basically going to run smaller firms out of business, and leave only the Goldman's of the world standing in the advisory roles because the compliance costs for small firms trying to prove something that is unprovable were going to produce a cost structure that was impossible for them to overcome. Realistically it wasn't going to what Congress wanted because they have no idea how this structure actually works. And that was what the body responsible for enforcing it had to say about it.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 09:41 PM) What was Avi's in 2015? I believe the technical term for it is LOL>

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 08:52 AM) That would be a bad trade. Need one more piece like Reed or Perez. I really think the start of an Astros trade needs to be Martes, Reed, and Tucker if Bregman is off of the table. Then fill in from there.

QUOTE (New Era on South Side @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 05:05 PM) What is the far left and how are they different than "a liberal" or just your average democrat? Anyone to the left of Pence has been labled as a Liberal by a certain poster that set of this discussion.

I love how two months into the rebuild fans are already taking trades personally

CSN Chicago ‏@CSNChicago 1h1 hour ago Blackhawks change lines again ahead of matchup with Coyotes - http://bit.ly/2kZ7Cm4

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-best-an...-team-defenses/

QUOTE (shipps @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:55 PM) If we can get him for our second and a third next year I would be pretty damn excited. You could still draft a defensive beast with the third pick and add Jimmy G? Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiit. If we sent then our second, and next years second, plus added a top D stud at #3? This might actually be a playoff team. The Bears have assloads of cap space too.

Vice puts this into a little bit different perspective. The IB publication left out this line. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/apparent...e=vicetwitterus

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:28 PM) The second half of this post is a really important point. A lot of the people that participated in the women's march or protested at airports, or those who are just straight up jamming the phone lines of representatives are people who have never previously been politically active. If that portion of the Democrats stays politically active, the midterms could actually be kind of interesting. This is exactly what I have seen. Let me put it this way. In my entire life I have never voted for Democrat as President. I have voted for a couple for Governor/Senator/Rep over the years. I have actually worked on the campaigns of a few for local office. But if the alternative is another four years of Donald Trump, I will seriously consider voting for the Democratic candidate for President in 2020. It won't really help in the mid terms as we have one of the most safe Democrats in the House in Pete Visclosky, plus anther Dem in the Senate in Joe Donnelly (who I have voted for in the past).

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:22 PM) You don't know the far left then. They didn't vote for Clinton, and they won't vote for people like Kaine if they think he's not being "tough enough". Have fun with eight years of Trump then.

QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:12 PM) Way to ignore all the times they passed on that idea. Are there any intellectually honest liberals? Any? Way to ignore all of the times they didn't. You are literally posting in a thread that is here because the GOP engaged in the longest single obstruction of a Supreme Court candidate in the entire 241 year history of the United States of America. You can't be anymore dishonest to say otherwise.

QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:09 PM) I have no idea what middle you speak of. The middle of the country, thrilled. The middle class. Happy. At least in my circles. Which is why Donald Trump was inaugurated with the lowest approval ratings in HISTORY. http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presiden...nald-trump.aspx Donald Trump's Presidential Job Approval Ratings Approval rating Dates % Most recent weekly average 45 Jan 20-29, 2017 Term average to date 45 Jan 20, 2017-present High point, weekly average 45 Jan 20-29, 2017 Low point, weekly average 45 Jan 20-29, 2017 High point, three-day average 46 twice; last on Jan 23-25, 2017 Low point, three-day average 42 twice; last on Jan 26-28, 2017 Gallup Donald Trump's Presidential Job Approval Ratings -- Historical Comparisons Average for U.S. presidents 53 1938-2017 Average for elected presidents' first quarter 63 various Other presidents in February of first year Barack Obama 64 Feb 2009 George W. Bush 59 Feb 2001 Bill Clinton 55 Feb 1993 George H.W. Bush 63 Feb 1989 Ronald Reagan 53 Feb 1981 Jimmy Carter 69 Feb 1977 Richard Nixon 60 Feb 1969 John Kennedy 72 Feb 1961 Dwight Eisenhower 68 Feb 1953

QUOTE (brett05 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:06 PM) They literally did not. They bent over backwards and refused to use the power of the purse. The color of the sky in my world is blue, and yours? Thankfully they have this wonderful tool called google in the 21st century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...hutdown_of_2013