southsider2k5

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:05 AM) Unless you're the Sox, and then you take the "easiest signing". Not easiest. Anybody is easy if you throw a ton of money at them.

Out of curiousity, has anyone stopped to wonder why this thread is up over 200 posts or so, and there isn't a thread at all on Hsu?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 11:18 AM) So Kap, why is it we only seem to be bombing non Christian countries? Hmm. Good point. Lets invade Mexico just to prove that we don't discriminate. Oh wait, they are already invading us! Your hyperbole is killing me. Seriously. I can't drink anything when I read your posts anymore, because they are making me laugh that hard.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:50 AM) http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/070907/greenspan_market.html?.v=6 Well, if Greenspan thinks that, I wonder when we are going to have our 1,000 point in one afternoon drop? So far we are stuck in a range between 13k and 13.5k. Its going to take the rate cut, or lack there of, to get out of it. We are going to trade sideways until the market gets it into its head what is going to happen. I think after today's news we will see a nice little selloff into the weekend, as no one will want to be long. I think we settle close to 13k.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:30 AM) Just because a lot of players do it, doesn't make it any more right. As for Ankiel, it looks like he stopped as soon as it became banned. If that's the case, then that does mitigate the damage a bit. Well, as soon as baseball banned it... It has always been illegal. And it doesn't matter how many people did it, it is wrong.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:43 AM) At 4:14am?!?! Yup. Usually back asleep by that time.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 09:33 AM) And while I am a big fan of soft science, economics is inexact. Some things are pretty common sense. If you lose more of your paycheck you spend less money. If everyone spends less money, the economy contracts. It isn't rocket science.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 09:31 AM) And that's probably most of America's sentiment - except I will say that Hillary has the Democratic party held hostage. Obama would be a much better candidate, despite the lack of experience... but the Clinton machine has not launched into full attack mode yet. They have hit him hard on any mistakes he has made. To be honest, he is running his campaign too cleanly to beat Hillary. The only Dem who really could beat Hill is Edwards, because he isn't afraid to do whatever it takes to win. Hell he is an ambulence chaser for god's sake, how much more dirty can you get? He'll has taken the gloves off at every turn. His problem is that he abandoned the middle of the road that he held in the 04 election, and went way too far to the left. Hillary will beat him down because she will take everything in the middle.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:53 AM) ^^^^SS^^^^ I am still trying to warm up to a candidate. Early on I thought McCain would be the guy, but he's falling flat in my eyes. Edwards was intriguing, but I'm not matching up well with him. Hillary would be about my last candidate. I think I would prefer Edwards to Hillary. I'm thinking you may want Hillary as the Dem nominee, knowing she'd have a harder time getting elected. Although, no one on the Rep side is exciting me. This is the worse group of candidates in my lifetime, but, the most exciting speakers and personalities. We may have finally reached Hollywood, reality show, levels. To be honest, the only top contender for the Dems I don't dispise is Obama. I do at least respect him. Richardson also seems decent, but he has zero chance at winning. I am not much of a Guiliani fan, but of all the repubs, he might be the most electable because he has some middle of the road positions. Romney has flipped flopped more than an IHOP, and the rest of them hardly merit a mention. Thompson is interesting, as he is really selling himself as a Reagan Republician, but I am in wait and see mode on him. I do wish more candidates had waited as long as he did to declare, but what are you going to do.

QUOTE(Middle Buffalo @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 12:31 AM) I like how so many people only point to the negatives of illegal immigrants, and how they seem to believe that there would be little impact in removing them from our economy. As has been pointed out, many illegals have valid SS numbers. It may not be theirs, but they are employed, and they do, in fact, pay into SS and the other taxes that we all pay. Unfortunately for them, they won't see the benefits when the time comes to draw the money out. For those illegals who work "off the books," how is it any different from the countless Americans who do the same? Or do American citizens honestly report all of their income to the government? I think we all know people who do "side jobs" for cash. Illegals buy goods (cars, gas, clothing, food, etc) here in the US for personal consumption. Remove them, and how do some of these smaller businesses survive. Illegals rent properties (houses and apts). Remove them, and how do landlords survive? Why should US business owners pay the price because the government failed to secure the borders and control the flow of immigration? Also, it's a bit short-sighted to point out that native Spanish speakers place a strain on the education system because we have to hire teachers to teach them How do we know they are illegal? Many illegals have children born here in the US, and according to the laws of our land, these children are US citizens. They have valid birth certificates and social security numbers. Do we deny these legal US citizens their Constitutional rights? Sure illegals in some ways place a strain on the economy, healthcare, and educational systems, but they also create value. I don't think solutions like massive deportation or building a wall are viable options. In fact, if we do build a wall, it's only as effective as the people we entrust with the job of guarding who comes and goes - and it's a little naive to think that guards can't be bought off by coyotes. It happens every day. Not everyone who entered this country illegally did so by wading accross a river or trekking through a desert or underground through sewer lines. Ah yes values. For that kind of value, we should annex and collect their taxes, considering just those three things are about 10% of Mexicos entire annual GDP. Imports from Mexico alone total about $200 billion a year. So in reality we are supply Mexico with 25% of their GDP A YEAR! I think they get a little bit of value from us. To break that number down a little bit, that is every man woman and child in the US supplying almost $1000 worth of economy to Mexico. I really don't want a lecture on what we owe them.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:27 AM) At 4:14am? On the train to work...

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 07:39 AM) Just to follow up on this situation. Sweeney will play in the Arizona Fall League, which is no surprise. People who were clamoring for him to be recalled, again, there was a reason. He is being given some time off to get healthy and going to the Arizona Fall League will be good for him. Also, Sisco is being given some time off and will play winter ball in Mexico as will Brian Anderson. Are they sending Sisco down there as a starter again?

QUOTE(Reddy @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 07:21 PM) wrong. repealing GWB's tax cuts for the rich puts money right back into the system and that's the money he plans to use for this. Google the multiplier rule of economics and get back to me on that, check out supply and demand.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 09:55 PM) If last time is any indication...the only thing that's going to matter anyway is who wins Iowa. And at the last block of polls I saw from there...Iowa looked like a complete tossup right now. Depending on the Poll and its likely voter screen you can find all 3 of them either tied or leading by 5 points. He is employing the John Kerry system and pretty much giving up everywhere but Iowa. I am not sure why, because Edwards doesn't need his rich wife to bail out his campaign, so he should be able to put money elsewhere, but he isn't. I guess he is trying to do the old momentum thing, or trying to minimize his spending at this time. The bad thing is that he is even way behind in South Carolina, which is his state of birth. Thankfully it looks like Edwards is dead in the water, because I really believe I would have 4 years of Hillary! versus four years of Edwards.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 02:55 PM) Huh? TALKING to a hooker in a bar, if sex never comes up, is not illegal and could never be successfully prosecuted. And sex in a car may or may not qualify for lewd acts in public, depending on where the car was, etc. Slippery slope? You seem to just throw everything remotely similar into the lake. There has to be a line somewhere, and Craigs repeated, complex and obvious actions make that clear. Maybe we instead of Texsox, we should call him Minnesotasox... You know, the land of 10,000 Lakes.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 02:15 PM) I don't think I understand your response to my question. I have no stance on this issue so I'm not sure why you are placing one upon me. That's all right, I kinda figured as much.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 01:07 PM) This is a question out there for everyone because I really want to know the answer: If all illegal immigrants were shipped off tomorrow how do you think your life or lifestyle will change? I'll tell you what. You start sending me your paycheck to show that YOU are serious about taking care of the rest of the world's poor, and then we can talk. Its easy to be noble when you are expecting someone else to pay for it. Prove to me you practice what you preach, and support my child(ren).

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 01:07 PM) Actually illegals are receiving those benefits, you've said so before. You have stated, and I have agreed, that it is costing the US a considerable sum in aid to illegals working low income jobs. (Those with forged documents, etc.) The only illegals not receiving aid are the ones working jobs "off the books". Once we put those "on the books" and no matter who works them, it's going to cost us. Perhaps this is when we cut back these programs for the working poor. Actually I don't believe that I have ever said that the illegals are receiveing benefits. I have said they are burdening social services such as hospitals and jails, but I don't think I ever said anything about government benefits. You make it sound like every single illegal is here using someone else's social security card, paying taxes, and receiving social services. This is not the truth. If it were the truth, one in twenty five person's social security numbers in the whole country has been stolen. As I have stated in the past, anyone who is here committing that kind of fraud, should be deported instantly, and not allowed to return or become a citizen.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 01:11 PM) I'm trying to remember the last time one of these wasn't staged to a "T". At a firehouse, hometown crowds, etc. Since he has even less experience than Obama, I am certain he won't receive much traction from the GOP loyalists who used that as a reason not to support Obama. BTW, before someone gets their panies in a bunch, I agree the lack of experience is troubling for a candidate regardless of party. Not sure what you mean, but you realize that Thompson served more years in the Senate than either Clinton, Obama, or Edwards, right?

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 12:56 PM) Is it OK if we just say you're a Royal Pratt? I Kid Because I Care® Or a Royal with Cheese?

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 08:58 AM) I plan on celebrating this birthday like I celebrate all holidays, quietly sitting on the trunk of my car drinking a case of malt liquor in the parking lot. Thanks! In that case I will see you in Fedder's Alley Happy Birthday big man

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 12:10 PM) So you are not refering to workers, just the unemployed? Where I am coming from is take those that are working, removing them and replacing them with citizens will not make a difference at all. When you talk about the bottom 4% of earners having a net income, I assume you were talking about workers ans in that situation it just doesn't matter. I've never been for allowing people without means of support come here. All immigration should be tied to jobs. There are a ton of government programs out there. I detailed them a few posts ago. Illegals are not getting them. American citizens of the same bottom quartile economic situations are getting this aid. Off of the top of my head, and obviously not all inclusive or that everyone is on all of these... social security, unemployment, medicare, medicade, welfare, energy assistance, food stamps, public education, grant programs, earned income credit.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 11:56 AM) Of course it will. But how will filling those jobs with immigrants cost more than filling them with citizens? Citizens are already here and factored into the equation. Illegals are here and not paid for. If they are legalized, they will be added to all of the federal programs they are able to receive. Why is that such a weird concept? If you have two children and pay their bills you have your budget. Then if your neighbor three kids decide to move in, and you decide to take care of them, you are now caring for five people, on basically the same budget. If you tell them to go back next door, then you are only paying for two people.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 09:35 AM) That was a great little debate there. Good to see some real debate on the matter. I cannot remember the last time the Republican party actually, publically, discussed an issue. Makes me like Ron Paul that much more - he actually sees the difference between the current wave of neo-cons (the morality control squad, looking to set the world "right", laws and lives be damned) and the more traditional conservatives (war to defend and not to conquer, foreign policy to protect the nation's interests). Its too bad that Paul is instantly dismissed as a nutjob nationally. He saids some smart things, and might be the closest thing to a REAL conservative this election has to offer. I don't agree with him on a lot of things, but still, he is consistant.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 11:14 AM) Not a race thing. What is the difference between a new immigrant working a $14,000 year job and a citizen. What additional benefits does an immigrant take that a citizen would not? We agree that the working poor consume more in benefits then they contribute. I just have never seen a difference between a lifelong citizen and a new immigrant in the economic impact. So adding 12 million new people will not have an economic impact?