southsider2k5

Welcome to the workplace old man, and happy birthday!

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 04:25 PM) The laws should be changed. Here is an example - if you so thoroughly screw up your company, as a C-level executive, that the government has to step in and spend money, then guess what? All compensation you receive after that point is subject to seizure by the government to cover the costs of your mistakes. You also would be subject to lawsuits by employees and shareholders effected by your decisions (which is already partially true). Any stocks, options or phantom shares you hold are subject to same. Now, that doesn't cover everything, but its a start. You could also lace this in with bankruptcies. Backruptcy law should put executive compensation beyond existing pure-salary levels at the very bottom of the pay-of pile if a company enters bankruptcy. Two things. I would like to see that law done to cover strictly illegal acts. If mistakes are made in good faith, I have a hard time taking away compensation. Second, if you remove compensation for companies in bankruptcy, they will never come out. Ask Kap how hard it is to entice execs to work at a company in bankruptcy, he knows. You have to pay A LOT more because of the condition of the company. Its kinda like trying to attract a free agent to play for a bad baseball team. You have to overpay. You would be sealing companies to a fate of liquidation with that law.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 10:43 AM) <!--quoteo(post=1599641:date=Apr 2, 2008 -> 07:15 AM:name=NorthSideSox72)-->QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 07:15 AM) <!--quotec-->I think you guys have to seperate the executives who run the firms and the firms themselves as entities. The firms employ thousands not to mention provide liquidity and stability to the markets - they need to have a safety net. The executives who leapt off the buildings, on the other hand, need to be held accountable. Steven nails it. Your house is going in to foreclosure and the government won't bail you out? Go buy a house worth about $10 billion, so that if your house goes under, the fed will have to bail you out because its so big that it provides a major impact on the economy. We are quoting comedians now for economic policy? I can't wait to throw in some George Carlin in the envoirnment thread! Anyways, the even implication that some how the private person is out on their own when it comes to buying a house is freaking laughable. The government is involved in so many steps along the way to hold people's hand, it isn't even funny. Starting with the most obvious, HUD, who has programs for everything from being spoonfed the information in your mortgage, to grants for your first house, to getting a subisidized HUD house in your area, to how to sell your house. Then there is all of the government mandates closing steps, which turns closing on a house into a day long event with each page of paperwork explained to you ad nasuem, which still doesn't seem to help most people (wait my ADJUSTABLE rate mortgage can go up???). After that there are the tax deductions for your interest paid on your mortgage, and the property tax credit for your main residence. The sad thing is that I KNOW I am forgetting stuff here... But the main point is that there are TONS of safety nets that have existed for a long time here in the US. We hold people's hands along every step of the homeownership process, and still people don't get it. I don't know if we need to get a governmental agency in charge of smacking people's hands and yelling "no" like my mom used to when I tried grabbing stuff I didn't need in the store as a kid, but there is so much stuff out there now, I don't see the need for more. If you really want to stay out of trouble, you can do it, pretty much unless you are too lazy to seek out help.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 09:30 PM) Lyke OMGZ Tyrus tHoMaS for MVPPPPP!!!!1 He needs to learn to be a starting pitcher, that was he can show up once a week like he has been all season long...

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 04:25 PM) Huckabee doesn't really help McCain much IMO. The base will be fired up enough to vote against Obama. FOX news (and I suspect talk radio) has been non-stop Obama bashing for weeks now, and I don't see them stopping anytime soon. FOX and talk radio are pretty much what convinced neo-cons that they were the true conservatives and that they shouldn't support McCain. Now that Hannity and such are supporting McCain I would expect the true conservatives to be all for McCain. McCain should take a VP that is strong on the economy. Or someone that is totally rich and can buy tons of TV ads. I think McCain might go with Romney. The Sneed rumor in the ST today is that Rove really wants Romney on the ticket. Yuck.

Crist would also seem to be a favorite.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 02:43 PM) Quick thoughts: Who will McCain pick for VP? Mike Huckabee is my guess if Obama is the pick for the Dems. They need a real southern conservative righty to balance out the ticket.

I like the article a lot, except he does't really make the point that hasn't been made, and that is McCain never said we would be AT WAR for 100 years. He even sited examples like Korea and Germany, where there hasn't been a shot fired for over a half century. That still doesn't get the quote not used as something that was never said. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ope...0,4349671.story

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 01:46 PM) In your opinion, is more government regulation the way to go here? Not more, smarter. Currently we have a governmental agency for pretty much each piece of the financial sector, and they do not work with each other at all. The reality of the 21st century is that pretty much all of these things are intermingaled. Instead of having regulating bodies for stocks, another for options, another for futures, another for banking, another for mortgages etc, there needs to be one central agency to oversee all of this, and be nimble enough to manage the whole system. In my opinion it is something that probably should be a tool of the Federal Reserve Bank, as they are pretty much the overseers of the economy now anyway.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 08:56 AM) I think you guys have to seperate the executives who run the firms and the firms themselves as entities. The firms employ thousands not to mention provide liquidity and stability to the markets - they need to have a safety net. The executives who leapt off the buildings, on the other hand, need to be held accountable. Bingo. You can't think of the macro and micro in the same frame of mind. In the micro sense, there are banks and companies that need to go under. In the macro sense you HAVE to protect the banking system. Look no further than the Great Depression to understand why. The banking sector dried up, and all loaning completely stopped. There was no liquidity in the system, and it literally took the government spending, not of the publics works projects, but of WWII to really get things going again.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 09:13 PM) Wouldn't it be entertaining to find out? I'll give the standard, boiler plate, communist democrat answer on this one for now. If these financial institutions and investment banks are going to be bailed out by the taxpayer like banks, then they ought to be regulated like banks, have similar disclosure requirements to banks, be required to provide some measure of funding for insurance like banks, etc. Being very familiar with this stuff, it is coming. There is a real push to get ALL financial institiutions regulated by one government sector. The system we have now is from the 1930's and obvious doesn't work. Its a real mess.

Can we change this thread title to the Obama Cheerleading thread? There isn't even a hint of objectivity left here...

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 04:34 PM) According to CNBC, the Treasury Secretary told the NY Fed Chair that the Treasury Department would in essence take care of any losses that the Federal Reserve took on the Bear Sterns bailout package. So there you have it. When you take out a bad mortgage and lose your house, I'm sorry, there's nothing we can do. When you run a company in to the ground, don't worry, the taxpayers will take care of it, feel free to move on and run a couple other companies in to the ground. As long as you sell your stock when the price is high, you're set. Would you rather see the banking sector go under?

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 04:24 PM) Greatly appreciated. Thanks much. No prob... Anyone else still check their change for things like wheat pennies or new quarters? I was excited I got my first 2008 coins today.

Wow, what a great sign for IU.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 31, 2008 -> 11:10 PM) Great post, between this and and using Dotel instead of Linebrink, it wasn't Ozzie's greatest game. What is the reasoning behind Linebrink instead of Dotel? For me in a tie game, I look to the guy who has been a closer, because essentially he was asked to do just that, and not give up any runs. Its not really a set up role that we were asking, which is what Linebrink has always been asked to do.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 07:41 AM) Bit slow this morning Southsider. Yeah, lil bit.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 07:35 AM) Ugh

So Fields up to take Crede's spot and Sanchez to take Masset's? Interesting deal. Anyone know anything about these kids? Sanchez is the prospect ,most people wanted correct? Looks like Kenny won the staredown in this case. Now if something happens to Juan Uribe, Soxtalk will be the happiest place on earth.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 31, 2008 -> 12:50 AM) Are there any economically-inclined people who could try and put the "crowded out effect" into more layman terms? If I need to be more specific, I need help with regards to what the "crowded out effect" does to interest rates. Combining my in-class notes with what Wikipedia says... The government borrows more money which means it's going to spend more money. More money out there means a higher money supply which, in turn, means a higher demand for money. Once there's a higher demand for money, the interest rates rise. I also have Y in there but I'm having a difficult time making sense of it -- Y (presumably income or GDP) rises with government spending but falls (just a slight fall, though) when interest rates go back up? Think of it in terms of cost. Anything that costs more, is going to have less buyers, assuming normal behavior. If government borrows more money it drives up the cost of money, because it is the worlds largest user of money. At a point, it makes money to expensive, even for itself, so it cuts back on its own spending because money gets too expensive (I% gets too high, making borrowing too expensive). Y is income, GDP in a macro sense.

The most portable music player I own is an am/fm radio for Sox games.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 31, 2008 -> 10:19 PM) I don't know if McCain can bowl, but maybe he should challenge Obama to a match. He can't do much worse! http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0308/507545.html The problem is that he was WAY too sober. Any idiot knows you can't bowl sober...

Did someone just see "Wicked"?

QUOTE(BobDylan @ Mar 31, 2008 -> 06:48 PM) I doubt Ramirez gets sent down. They're not going to go with one backup MI and three backup OFers. It's going to take Richar or a trade to send Ramirez down. From what I saw of the guy in spring training, I wouldn't be surprised if he is sent down because he is batting about .100 when Richar is ready to come off of the DL.

Even if you throw out the final result of Nick Massetts outing, a day like today is why you need the guy in there. You have to have someone who can come out and give you those innings in garbage time. Even if Nick gets his ass kicked, it saves the pen for a day when they do have a chance to win a game. We had luck on our side and Massett was unhittable today, but in the focus of the rest of the series, we hardly touched the important guys in the pen. Those guys would have all had to log time today to make up for Buehrle getting smacked around. Even worse is that Danks, the 4 and 2/3 IP specialist from last year is going in the third game... think about the pen after a day like today, plus Danks getting shelled... It wouldn't be pretty. Just like you don't build a line up with 9 power hitters, you don't build a pen with 6 one inning guys. You need a mix.