southsider2k5

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 10:33 PM) Where exactly are you getting those numbers? It sure sounds like you're assuming that the plan will be paid for by taxing employer-provided benefits/removing that tax benefit. That is not in the plan as presented today. Put another Trillion dollars in to that infrastructure and see if it appears. "We don't like you people and you smell so we're going to make sure you can't see the doctor" is a horrible concept. It is rationing. It makes things more expensive for everyone. And rationing is exactly what is going to happen when you are adding whatever number of people to a system that is already having shortages of doctors, nurses, and facilities.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 10:22 PM) 1. How the fact that 1/4 of the country's population is uninsured at some point every year doesn't play in to this, especially when the elderly are all covered with Medicare, baffles me. That's exactly the point! 2. Why bother with the rest of the post? You are outright saying that you don't believe their math and giving absolutely no reasons why I should believe that your math is better than theirs, you're just repeating the challenges over and over. And hell, if you're giving me issues over the definition of the uninsured, how much of a problem can I give you for your artificial number of 20 million Illegals? At one point you are using 80,000,000 as your basis. When I challenge the numbers based on that, you are telling me that we would only have to pay for 48,000,000. Do you really wonder why I don't buy the company line? As for the illegals, I am not the one who has included them as a part of my figure to inflate the number as to impress the public with how bad things really are. If you are going to use the illegal aliens are a part of the uninsured, you should probably be able to explain how you are going to pay for them. The rest of the post is very important because it includes some very clear and simple facts that are being ignored in this argument. -How are we going to treat 48,000,000 or 80,000,000 more people in an infrastructure that is fixed? -How are we going to keep employees who are going to be taking an estimated 20-30% paycut while being asked to do something between 1/6 and 1/4 more workload depending on what day the numbers are being quoted? -Are employers really going to pay another cost for employees without dropping medical coverage as a benefit? -What incentive will there be for employees to pay a cost to their employer in the form of insurance, when the government will do it for cheaper?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 10:20 PM) There's no way in hell they know what it's going to cost. They will "misinterpret" the data and blame it on Bush, I'm sure. Hell we already saw how far under budget Bush's drug plan ended up being, there is no way in hell a complete insurance plan is coming in under cost. In reality, it just hasn't happened historically. I have seen nothing to indicate that without gutting services, that it can be done.

QUOTE (High Mileage @ Jul 13, 2009 -> 03:27 AM) Well deserved, although I am disappointed... How did their days off line up with the ASG?

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 10:01 PM) Take a look at this U.S population growth chart (based on census data) and take into consideration that we have had 0% job growth in the last decade and could easily see the next decade losing jobs rather than being able to break even. Anyone else see how this isn't going to work? It is called the collapse of a pyramid scheme.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 10:11 PM) Why in the world is this so hard to understand? At any given time, there are ~48 million uninsured in this country. Some of them are continuously uninsured. Some are not. During any given year, 80 million people, 1/4 of the country's population, will be uninsured for at least some time. Thank you for finally admitted the 80,000,000 number is garbage for this topic. Also I have noticed that you have ignored the rest of the post two times in a row now.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 10:01 PM) It's 48 million for this purpose. 80 million at some point during the year, on average about 48 million at any given time. "I still don't buy it". There's some counter-logic against the CBO numbers. LOL. Its 80,000,000 when it needs pity, but 48,000,000 when it comes to the CBO? So at any given time 32,000,000 are going to be going uninsured during the year? That sounds like it is more than 3% of the current uninsured to me. Are you sure you are looking at the right sets of talking points there? Those kinds of holes in logic are exactly why I don't believe the numbers. The figures change based on which arguement is being made, and I am just supposed to swallow all of that? Please. And like I said, the numbers don't add up. Basically they are saying they can do it cheaper than the private sector, while being able to absorb 20 million illegals, whatever population growth there is in the next 10 years, and not have a massive influx of insured because the employment sector gets sick of being taxed for something else and drops coverage. I'd love to hear the "logic" behind those assumptions.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 09:58 PM) You're not reading it correctly at all. That does not mean that the total cost of health care for everyone in the United States will be $100 billion a year. That is the additional cost of starting up this program and covering 97% of the remaining uninsured. So those 80,000,000 people you quoted are going to be covered for less than what the private sector is doing it at, there will be no population growth, and will be no large dropping of insurance by companies after the government taxes them for it. Yeah, I still don't buy it.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 09:35 PM) So, I guess KC will still have a baseball team in 2012. That's probably a matter of opinion... For most KC hasn't had a team in about 20 years.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 09:53 PM) So after all the hype, Wakefield's not going to pitch, is he? Screw Boston.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 09:14 PM) CBO score on the house version: cost is $1 trillion over 10 years, insures 97% of the population. Edit: that does not include any of the revenue measures. Bulls***. Break down their numbers. They are really trying to say that for $100 billion dollars a year (a trillion dollars divided by the 10 years) they could provide near full coverage for the entire country. Perspective here. That is $3000 per person, per year, for 10 years. (300 million people, divided by 100 billion dollars) Excuse me while I LMFAO. Most companies are paying in the area of 10,000 dollars per employee for health insurance when you add back the employee contribution. And we are supposed to believe that the government is going to somehow insure the most uninsurable people in the country for 30% of what the private sector does it? Good god, are people really that naive?

Any able bodied or minded person who receives government money directly should do community service to pay back the people who are funding them.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 04:27 PM) How about the most incredible accomplishment of man period? I would go with either the computer or generation and transportation of electricity, but it is in my top 10 probably.

QUOTE (The Critic @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 02:11 PM) I wonder how much he had to do with those signings? Remember how everyone said "Dale finally figured out how to work the cap" when the Hossa deal was announced? Maybe he didn't = maybe Stan/Scotty Bowman did. Makes sense to me. Detroit is the master of the salary cap.

forgot how funny a show The Nanny was. I'm glued to Nick at Nite now.

I'm not surprised other teams are looking at him. We are looking pretty hard at him, it would be hard to imagine other teams want to see if he is as good as his numbers would indicate.

One of the most incredible accomplishments of US history

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 11:45 AM) He isn't the president of their country and if they don't want to shake his hand they don't. If Obama extended his hand out to me for a handshake, no way I'm shaking his hand. I respect the office, but I don't respect Barry one bit. For that matter, I wouldn't shake Bush's or Clinton's hand as well, along with a numerous amount of other politicians. Your words are completely contradictory. You can't respect the office and then respect none of the individuals who have been in it in your lifetime.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 14, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) Refresh my memory folks. Are we on our own for Sox tickets that night? Yes. We don't really have enough people to do anything formal. WSI might be doing a patio party, I am not sure. If they are, they are a great group to sit with, as I have sat with them a couple of different times.

Hey guys, just to reconfirm, this is the list we have so far... Southsider2k5 Northsidesox72 Chisoxfn shipps kapkomet The Beast Molto Bigsqwert robinventura23 TitoMB345 (if you guys don't mind..) SouthsideDon48 Jenksycat almagest I don't think Gage or Kap is playing anymore, but I need to find out if everyone else still is. We are also still open to having people join us, as we want to make sure we have enough people on the day of the game, as people always don't show up for various reasons at the last minute. PLEASE COME AND JOIN US.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Jul 12, 2009 -> 11:04 PM) One of my favorite things to do when I'm bored is to find threads like these from 2003, when Sweeney-Anderson-Reed were going to patrol the OF for the next 10 years, Kris Honel was going to be pitching behind Buehrle, and Royce Ring was going to be closing soon. If the Sox can get major league production from two of Flowers, Mitchell, Carter, Hudson, and Danks, it's a huge success. Not to mention how much of a turnover in the everyday players there is for the Sox. I would be willing to bet that at least 10 of the 25 men on the roster on the Opener for 2011 are not on the roster today.

There is no way in hell I would go to Wrigley for it. The Cell I might, but I wouldn't know if I would want to be around that volatile of a crowd.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 12, 2009 -> 07:53 PM) Funny you say that, because the Trib is making it sound like when TCQ comes back, it may not be Wise, or even Anderson, that is out of a job... but Fields. I don't get it. So who would play first when Konerko is off? That doesn't make any sense to me.

If only some admin would get off of his ass and do something about the scourge that is lostfan. Lazy Soxtalk Admins.

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Jul 12, 2009 -> 04:00 PM) Why could they not play the second game? I was only 7 at the time, it's foggy to me, although I remember it vaguely The playing field was destroyed. They couldn't play softball on it, let alone baseball. We ended up having to forfeit games after it because the field was screwed up so badly.