southsider2k5

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 01:01 PM) Let's hypothesize that I own a couple million dollars in stock for a company that pays a large dividend, like GE, or Exxon. Let's say I'm pulling in enough in dividends to make oh, $40,000 or so per year. Let's also assume that the company is one of those companies paying virtually nothing in income taxes or getting even a few billion in subsidies from the government. I sit back and pay 5% taxes on those dividends. The company pays no tax on their earnings. The people purchasing those products have to pay taxes on the products they purchase, but they also have to pay taxes on their income. Compare that to a person with a normal job, working 40+ hours a week. They're paying what rate on taxes? 15-30% give or take their exact income. So my question is, if a company is paying virtually nothing on taxes, why should the person owning stock in that company also be paying 5% taxes on their dividend income? This is just another example of how, under the banner of "Tax cuts stimulate the economy always and pay for themselves always" the wealthiest of the wealthy, the investor class, who are able to afford their own lobbyists, have structured the tax code to the disadvantage of people who are actually working. Enough things are deductible that it allows companies to maximize their income over a quarter and pay that out to its shareholders, keeping the stock price high and keeping the people who own a lot of stocks raking in the money. But, the more average person, the person who can't afford his or her own private lobbyist, gets forced to pay a much higher rate of taxation because he or she can't pay someone to write the loopholes in to the laws. Give you another example. Hedge fund managers, some of the guys who helped build this disastrous mortgage bubble, get taxed at a dramatically lower rate than you or I on the income they earn just because there's a loophole built in to the tax scheme for them. And every time there's an effort to close it, there's an uproar in Congress about how we can't afford to increase taxes when either the economy is growing or when the economy isn't growing (take your pick). How much income tax do you think GE or Exxon is generating in employee income taxes? What is that worth to the American economy? You know as well as I do that companies will protect their profits first and foremost. If their taxes start getting hit, they are going to look to cut costs, and the biggest cost to a company is always its employees. Companies are already fleeing overseas to avoid paying corporate taxes, and they are also refusing to list their stock here for trading because of Sarbines Oxley's costs. This is my biggest pet peeve about the Barrack Obama and the Democratic movement in general. I do not believe that success should be penalized. You can not support a country by taking from what works, and giving to that which doesn't. Every single experienment in this kind of economy has been an abject failure if tried on any type of scale because it quashes motivation and effort. Looking specifically at an Exxon, envision this for a second. Obama is elected President and enacts the windfall profits tax. Exxon now has no motivation what-so-ever to find more oil and petroleum based products to sell, because the Congress in its infinate wisdom found an arbitrary number and penalized the company for going over that. Eventually XOM is going to quit looking for ways to earn profits, because there is no reason to earn them if you give them all back. They will quit looking for oil, expanding and repairing refinaries, looking for alternative fuels etc. Instead of bringing the price of gasoline down, it will have the opposite effect and make it skyrocket in the long term. I'd even be willing to bet that they would be willing to sit on supply enough to bring demand down so that it hits the optimimum pricing curve right at where the windfall profits tax starts. It would be an unmitigated disaster to the US economy. Cranking up the corporate taxes on companies will have the same net effect. You start cutting into profit margins, and you start getting people fired. Look no further than the airline industry right now. The price of gasoline is their defacto tax. It has exploded over the last few years, and look what has happened to them. Tens of thousands of people have been fired. Flights have been junked. Planes have been parked. Service is worse than it has ever been. They can afford to do anything different. Look at Ford and GM's cost models versus Toyota and Honda. Their R&D has been non-existant because they have been saddled with the ginormus legacy costs of health care and pensions, not to mention wages that are WAY higher than their Japanese competion. Now they are stuck behind and firing tens of thousands of people as well. Basically what it comes down to is all of the calls for taking money from people have a direct human effect that is easy to ignore when things get turned into an us versus them class warfare election, just like this one is getting turned into again. If you actually stop and examine some of the real word effects of these ideas, they aren't nearly as bright as they seem on the chalkboard.

We all should set up a commodity fund together... It would be interesting to actually put some of this knowledge to a real life test. I know this great little trading firm we can use Its funny because with my own money, I have been pretty right, I have just been a month early on all three of my crude oil plays.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8081102145.html

QUOTE (YASNY @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 12:14 PM) It was a fun year. The Na Na Hey Hey thing and the curtain calls started that year. That's still my all-time favorite song.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 12:11 PM) So we want to encourage only the wealthy to run for office? That's exactly what we do today anyway.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/08/1...ref=mpstoryview http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/08/12/fake.fi...eref=rss_latest

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/pos...TI0NDRjNGJmMDA=

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 09:50 AM) I agree, I've seen those as well. But again, we aren't talking about a guy with decent numbers at AAA. This guy is nails down there. I can't recall a pitcher that was THAT good at AAA who went on to absolutely suck at the major league level. I'm sure there are a few... they just don't come to mind. Ehren Wasserman?

OK so we are a good amount of the way into the season, about 3/4s or so, and I want to hear what you biggest screw up was when you were envisioning 2008 was? Did you have the Sox in 4th place? Did you have Carlos Quinten in AAA? Gavin Floyd released? Nick Swisher as a .280 30 homer guy? Scott Linebrink as teh Suxxors? I'll even start. My biggest miss was on Alexei Ramirez. I liked the signing for the price, but I really didn't think we would get anything out of him this year. I was happy to get production in the last year or two of the contract to justify the $5 million we signed him for.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 07:44 AM) Winston-Salem made 5 errors in that game (2 by Paiml). Also interesting, Retherford was leading off. Someone has to explain to me why Jason Childers can put up not just good, but downright dominant numbers at Charlotte, but he'd be awful in the majors. If anyone has any sort of scouting type info on the guy, I'd like to hear it. The guy is striking out a batter an inning, has only 13 walks in 53 IP, AvgA is .166, and he induces a lot of groundballs (2.18 GO/AO). He's old (33), but really, who cares if he could help the bullpen out? There are plenty of examples of guys who mastered AAA but had no chance at the ML level. Look no further than one of the nicest guys of all time in Jeff Bajenaru.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 08:05 AM) here's what bothers me. I understand the cheating part.. that is between him and his wife and no one else. It was until he made her a central part of his campaign. That changes all of the bets. Its the same reason all of the Larry Craig and Elliot Spitzer stuff was such a big deal, they made religion and law the main tenets of their campaigns, while simultaniously pissing all over them out of the public's eyes.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 07:51 AM) If that's the case, either the coaching or the attitude have to be questioned. Probably the attitude considering how quickly he got benched. The Sox are really high on Buddy Bell, as is a lot of MLB.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 07:49 AM) Ozzie said something that raised some questions in my mind. He said that Cora had worked with Fields on his defense in spring training, as he was not seeing those results now. So, here are my questions. 1. Does this signal a Fields attitude problem? 2. Is there a lack of coaching going on in Charlotte? Call it a hunch, but I'd be more inclined to lean toward #2. I think something completely different 3. He lapsed back into old habits, techiniques, and forms.

I didn't have Nick on my list. Actually I didn't vote for anyone who is having their first year with the Sox. To me a favorite player has to grow on you. I could see Nick being a favorite in a year or two, but not yet.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 07:29 AM) All us Admins look alike on the internets. I resent that remark, I am MUCH better looking on the internet!

If Dubai is interested in it, there is no one out there with deeper pockets.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 12, 2008 -> 06:40 AM) I knew somebody was going to ask that. No. I'm talking strictly about how everybody is ripping how Edwards is a s***bag of a person horrible person because he cheated around on his wife, to point out the fallacy of labeling someone's entire character based off one f***up. MLK just happens to be the easiest example because everybody knows at least most of his story. For me its not that he cheated on his wife, though it doesn't help. The part that really cheeses me is tha the paraded his dying cancer ridden wife as one of his biggest reasons for everything in his campaign, and all of the policies that he wanted to enact. He wanted the whole rest of the country to make all of these changes because of the life changing experiences he has had, and it turns out that wasn't even enough to keep his pecker in his pants. If he had just cheated on his wife that would be one thing, but he used her to symbolize everything he stood for, and it turns out that wasn't important enough for him to consider as sacred. Screw John Edwards and the two faced horse he rode in on.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 02:13 AM) So do you lose all respect for Martin Luther King, since J. Edgar Hoover thought he was a Communist and caught him cheating on his wife in hotel rooms? Just curious. Sure, it isn't cool and all, but it's not like people who cheat on their loved ones are violent criminals or anything. We are not comparing the accomplishments of MLK and John Edwards are we?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 08:57 PM) So...are you saying we should be using military force against Russia right now, yes or no? Going by Obama's words earlier on Kosovo, he seems to think so. http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/pos...DVmMzAxODBjZTc= We are talking about an incoming NATO member who is trying to move into the Eurpoean community, and who has been recognized by the entire planet as a sovergien nation.

QUOTE (quickman @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 02:18 PM) these types of moves are not the sign of a team going all out to win this year. Its dissapointing really. Its crunch time, and we have DJ carrarsco in the middle fo the fire every fifth day? Not sure about that. They probably checked in with linebrink and he said no way I can be back in august and then made a move like this. What choice do we have? What guys are out there that we are turning down great deals for? It doesn't really seem like we have a choice right now.

I will say one thing for Kenny. It seems like it is the no-namers and the washed up guys that he some how seems to pull out of his rear-end into a year or so worth of a good ball-player.

65-51 +0.5 games over MN

QUOTE (Texsox @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 10:35 AM) That was my first criteria. I also looked at longevity with the team, but looking over my list, it wasn't as much of a factor. There was also guys that were difficult to split up. Zisk and Gamble for example. The Southside Hit Men were my favs. Collectively they were better then by themselves. That was the first team I remember seeing at all, and those were the first players that I nominated. I know I have a lot of 1983 team guys as well.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 11, 2008 -> 09:36 AM) I have no idea who this guy is. I agree with DBAHO. It looks like we're just desperately reaching for anyone we can get a hold of. If these are the moves we're going to depend on, then we're screwed. We need a legitimate starter. What we need, and what we can get are two different things. Kenny is trying to improve the team, even if it just incrementally. Like it or not, things like budgets and what another team is willing to deal us do come into account here.

I didn't list anyone I didn't see play.