southsider2k5

Cleveland unless the twins O and D are way better than last year. Detroit doesn't even belong in the same class as the other two.

I would just like to say in people's defense that a Monday nite in May is a horrible time to have this outing and expect 300 people to show. People have to work, there are people still away at college, and kids are still in high school. It was unrealistic to expect a big turnout with those circumstances. I know it looks bad, but the date picking was awful. There are lots of proms, finals, field trips, work etc that make this impossible for a lot of people.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 01:00 PM) You're right. We're only talking about the USA. How it affects our country should be the only issue, not where they're coming from. Please. This policy is by and large made to appease Mexico, and Mexican immigrants, as they are the vast majority of the people who are in the USA illegally. They also are the quickest growing minority in the USA, and so politicians are trying to curry favor with them for votes with a half-assed policy that does nothing to solve the main problem, and will cause many of the same economic issues that they say they are trying to prevent us from happening. Like I said personally I believe these jobs should be open to anyone based on skill level mostly, but I could also understand a policy that allowed workers to compete for these jobs based on the conditions in their home country.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:42 PM) I think at this point your argument is starting to verge on what I would call "Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good." Yes, it is unfair that people from Africa can't just take a quick walk here and find themselves having a path to citizenship after a decade or so, while maybe someone from Mexico can. However, the fact is that they're already here, in large part because of the fact that the government has refused to figure out any legitimate way to solve the problem, whether it's increasing the legal immigration quotas to fill the employee void we all discuss or penalizing employers who do hire illegals. So, yes, it would be nice if we could just start over at zero cost, send every one of the illegal immigrants back to whatever their country of origin actually was, and then allow a worldwide admission process to fill the spaces we do have open. But at this point, that's just so far from impractical as to be laughable, and in fact, even keeping something like that as an option, no matter how remote, is only delaying actually coming up with a real solution. If we want to do this correctly, in the sense of opening up avenues to the entire world that are actually fair, we're going to have to decide to start doing that right now. There's just no way we're going to be able to conduct a forced mass migration of immigrants out of the U.S. and then allow a return flow of equal or slightly greater size from the entire world. The idea of punishing those who are already here just can't stay on the table if we want to actually come up with good policy. Here would be what I would outline as the tenets of how I would build this sort of policy: 1. Guest worker status for the immigrants who are already here, but with a very long path towards citizenship. 2. A flexible guest worker program for those who are not currently in the country, tied to the demand for those levels of employment. The path to citizenship through this method should be significantly shorter than the path for those who are already here, so as to discourage people from sneaking across and then applying as a guest worker, and to provide some encouragement for people to return home. 3. Strong future punishments for illegal border crossings. This only works, though, if the guest worker program is done correctly, such that the supply is allowed to keep up with demand and not shut off because we get some racist in Congress or the DHS who decides they don't like a certain type of folk. 4. Stronger punishments for businesses who hire illegal immigrants. Fines strong enough to touch the bottom line, i.e. in the hundreds of thousands per worker. Actual enforcement mechanisms, which cannot be negotiated downwards in exchange for campaign contributions (i.e. Walmart). And if an equitable program provides more benefits to one group, that is fine with me. I don't care if it is icky, its what is right. All we are doing is swinging the pendulum to favor another group over someone else instead. Right now we are being fed a complete line of bulls*** by our politicians and our media that somehow this a guest worker program/amnesty is going to fix something. Again and again I have said that the root of the problem is being ignored, instead to have people focus on the sidepoints. Again-This program will provide economic harm to this country as a whole, and many, many individuals here as well. It is not being portrayed that way at all. People who want to see our laws followed, and the problems solved are instantly waved off as racist, even though the very system they are endorsing is just as racist, except for who it favors. No one seems to want to tell the otherside of the coin on this, and it is a joke. I agree actually with the vast majority of what you are saying Balta, and as I said, I could even agree with wiping the slate clean for the people who are here, provided the big problem is solved. I think there is way too much time being wasted with irrelevant details in this debate, and none on the causation of the problem.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:47 PM) Not sure where you're going with your new "racism" angle, but there are also illegal immigrants from Europe. But of course geography plays a role. It has always been easier, less costly, and more convenient to move people short distances as opposed to much farther ones. Also, I highly doubt anyone comes here with the plan to "wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way". And the language in whatever laws are made will not read "only for Mexicans and South Americans." It's for all immigrants. And by and large who are the 12 million illegal aliens in the US? Its kind of like the law in Maryland that specified a company of a certian size had to provide its employees with health insurance, of which it just happened to be one company that met all of the criteria. Even though it doesn't speficy who it is for, it is pretty obvious who the laws are trying to pacify, I mean I have yet to see a large contingent of Asians out protesting the new proposals yet, right? There are people here illegally from all over, but don't play games and act like this isn't almost exclusively one country we are talking about.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:34 PM) You kinda answered it within the "question," no? It's sorta like asking why it's cheaper to go to Wisconsin Dells than to fly to Paris or Rome. And that's my point. It shouldn't be that way. If we are going to open up the US job market to foreign labor, why shouldn't the entire world be on equal footing, and not just one race who happend to hit the geography lotto? I honestly believe it is racist to open the US labor market to primarily one race. Then again our entire immigration system is racist as it considers certian countries immigrants by their country of orgin, instead of simply by something like their plight, or their skills.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:56 AM) Very shameless (even though it's the best up-and-coming Bulls site of all time). But the link didn't work for me. Try this one and click the the forums when you get to the front page if the original link doesn't work for you... thanks for the heads up sleepy. http://www.talkbulls.com/frontpage/index.php

Awesome. Its shallow at best but hopefully justice is done for the family who died so that Ryan could get elected.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:11 PM) Are you one of those who thinks we should kick out the 12 million already here too? I have a hard time rationalizing the reward of illegal behavior, basically on the basis of geographic luck. Immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Europe have to go through a rigorous immigration process to become citizens of the US. People from our hemisphere know that they can sneak through our borders and wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way. The big picture for me is that we are not solving any long-term problems here. Like I said to Balta I could even understand amnesty if it meant we got a new policy that severely penalized people for hiring illegal labor. At least then the root of the problem is being identified. Today that root cause is being ignored again. Reagan and company did the samething in 1986, and it got us no where good. If we want to solve illegal immigration, we HAVE to remove every possible incentive for someone to come here illegally.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:12 PM) Well, for that I apologize, I did the best I could given that the quote tags didn't work right & I could barely tell who wrote which part. Maybe I shoulda just kept my mouth shut. And that is a hint of supply side economics, with a strong bit of demand-side economics as well yeah I have no idea why the tags didn't work. I tried fixing them, but it bombed. hopefully it is understandible enough.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:08 PM) Aside from the "even though the law is stupid it's the law and they shouldn't violate it" angle, can you offer up any other reasons as to why exactly we shouldn't allow a guest worker program to apply to those who are already here? My counterpoint to that sort of argument would be to say that since there seems to be a real demand for these workers, the problem is not that the people are coming over, the problem is that the government's immigration policy has been out of date for decades, and I find it difficult to justify punishments handed down because people violated an unjust or foolishly designed law. Because I don't see rewarding illegal activity and penalizing legal citizens and immigrants as being more productive than stupid politicians who are afraid of growing a backbone to cut off the problems at its roots, instead of just pruning the weeds every 20 years. The US tried this once already, it failed miserably. NOTHING in the new bills address the root of the problem, and that is the US provides incentive for people to break its own laws. Heck I could even stomach the guest worker program being talked about if it included real economic incentives for not hiring illegal labor, but it doesn't. In 20 years, we will be looking at this problem again, and wondering how we can fix it, without pissing off the largest minority in the US. If there is a real demand for these jobs, and the numbers of 500,000 (from just Mexico)people a year still trying to get into the US are true, all of the doom and gloom about needing workers will take care of itself because there is still a major supply of labor trying to get into the US. Plus I also believe that if these jobs are do desireable we shouldn't be committing an act of overt racism by setting up this program by and large to appease one country, which just so happens to be the quickest growing minority in the US. Why should Mexico and Central/South America by and large be favored for jobs in the US just because of the geographic luck of a shared porus border. Open the guest worker program to every country in the world, and let the potential immigrants compete with each other so that this is truely an equitable program. Why should potential Africian immigrants be penalized because they didn't have the ability to hire a Coyote to smuggle them through the dessert and hideout until the next amnesty was granted? Answer is they shouldn't. Its racist in its roots. If we opened this up to the world, we would have no problems replacing the illegal labor, and it would all be done legally.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:52 AM) Ugh...when the quote tags somehow don't work correctly, it's hard as all hell to Reply to a post. I think I'm therefore just going to reply to this part...which as far as I can tell hits on the ol' "You raise the minimum wage and you eliminate jobs" argument. As you can probably imagine, I don't subscribe to that statement, and at current levels, given that the workers making the minimum wage spend nearly 100% (or even over 100%) of what they earn, a raise in the minimum wage can often wind up creating jobs, as there are more people capable of buying products and services. I think the same sort of result could very well come from some sort of legalization/guest worker program which does bring these people out of limbo, for a couple reasons. First and foremost, you can get the same results as you do with increases in the minimum wage; people have more ability to purchase products, and if they do so in the U.S., then jobs can be generated in the U.S. Is that a hint of supply side economics I detect in your voice? That answer you quoted, is pretty well taken out of context actually. Tex was referring speficially to farmers and food stuffs industries who are limited by the prices they can receive for their product, which is what I was responding to. If you take one specific industry and effectively say double their wage rate you will get firings/layoffs/increased prices in someway shape or form, or the industry/business will collapse, as profitability is removed as an incentive and the capital investment flees. In a macro view, if people are working they can create more jobs, but the net effect depends on how many other people lose their jobs, lose income from increased prices etc. Especially in an industry that is really sensative to price increases like food stuffs, that industry specifically would suffer in a micro sense. It all depends how those two things would balance out.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:50 AM) Nowadays most working in factories and such jobs use fake, stolen, or borrowed documentation. Some of them are good. It's not even tough to do. Drive down 18th or 26th Street and you can find them on the streets. It'll be such an easy excuse for those who hire them. Imagine the legal battles and companies finding ways to say they didn't know the documentation wasn't good. And I still would like to see information from a credible source (not a link from a site with an obvious anti-immigration agenda) that states that immigrants are such a burden on the economy. A sound guest worker program is the best possible solution. Immigrants aren't a burden on the economy, its illegal aliens that are a burden. One group did everything they were supposed to be here, the other violated the sovereinty of the US to be here. There is a big difference. So just because it is easy to buy illegal social security cards, companies shouldn't be responsible for who they hire? A survey of about 80 sex offenders in Chicago turned up that about 75% didn't live where they said they did, should we stop tracking sex offenders? People with expensive printers make easy and believable counterfiet money at home now, should we quit charging people with counterfeiting? Just because it wouldn't be easy to enforce, doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do. A guest worker program is exactly what is needed, except it needs to originate with people applying from outside of the US, and not after committing a crime to get into the US illegally.

From the Haircuts thread QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:19 AM) Its HAIR people. It grows back. QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:22 AM) Paulie wishes...

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:19 AM) Its HAIR people. It grows back. QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:22 AM) Paulie wishes...

Throw the book at him

Don't forget, the place to talk about Bulls basketball is now http://www.talkbulls.com/forums/index.php!!!!! There are discussions about the Bulls playoffs and even the MVP race in the NBA. It will also be the home for game threads throughout the rest of the season and the playoffs, plus all draft and free agent news. Check it out if you have not done so already!!! Remember this is one of the lastest projects from the people who brought you this website, so if you love the Bulls and Soxtalk, Talkbulls should be in your favorites now. [/shameless plug]

Quick someone needs to find the clip of Burns telling Mattingly to shave those sideburns!

I went last year and had fun. Granted I know some people over there as well as I know people from here, but I think I only heard one joke about people getting their parents to pick up people from Soxtalk, but I could have missed more too. I thought it was a great time and would recommend it to anyone who is still on the fence. really it is an excellent deal, and I think totally worth it. I look forward to seeing all my friends, both new and old at the COTC

Idol looking to rid itself of Ace? Queen seems to think so, and they aren't happy about the creative editing used by Idol... http://contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mn...ion%20_14_04_06

Net result is more outlays for the US government for more people, with a smaller tax base. Once again because of things like the earned income credit, the vast majority of these workers would be taking more out of the tax system than the paid in, thus reducing the tax base. Its not the same amout of taxes being paid in, it is substancially less... and that is before we start talking about the effect of 12 million new people on the social entitlement programs in the USA> If these jobs are that vital, why not establish a guest worker program for legal Mexican immigrants. If the offer of jobs here is that great that they are willing to work for the prevailing wages, and the supply is that great that the American workers still don't fill them, they will still be available for people to fill, except instead of entering the US illegally to get these jobs, have the guest worker program originate from people's country of origin, instead of after an illegal activity has already happened. Again all we are doing is rewarding an illegal activity AGAIN. Never did I say these businesses could handle higher wages. Don't start putting words into my posts. My point was actually to point out that there will be hirer wages if these folks are made legal, which isn't being pointed out in the mainstream anywhere. This will have a net loss job effect, and will put certian people out of business, whether we "send em all back to wheres they came from" or if we make them "guest workers". The only way that jobs, employment, and incomes will stay the same is through the status quo. The guest worker plan being bandied about as some sort of a saviour, will cost people, will shut down businesses/farms etc, and will result in wage based inflation. Those are economic facts, yet this plan isn't being put in the same terms, and I have no idea why. There are undocumented workers all around our country. We have senior citizens working off the books for cash so their pensions and social security are not cut. Then I guess you are against the guest worker program and legalization for illegal aliens who are currently here? I am all in favor of that too. $50,000 a pop will solve that problem, and it would almost have to be an accross the board thing to pass constitution muster, so as not be seen as aimed at one race, as it could be portrayed. By all means, come to the front door. That is exactly what I want. Don't come through our desserts, our steams, in the back of trucks etc. Apply through your consolate just like the rest of the world does. Why should these people get it any easier than any other immigrant? Yes Mike, the deficit will rise when workers are free to apply for the programs they are afforded by our government. Replacing undocumented workers, with documented workers will result in an increase to those entitlement programs. By ignoring the problem, those programs are not used as much. I'm not certain what point you are making. That would seem in favor of not doing anything. But now that the genie is out of the bottle, I don't think we can put it back in. No matter who is working these jobs legally, the benefits are the same. Illegals actually collect less benefits. How would we have less taxes paid if these workers were legal? Once again, negative marginal tax rate. Google the Earned Income Credit when you get a chance and realize that if you don't make a certian level of income you get back everything you pay in taxes. If you receive credits like this one, you can get those back on top of not paying any money at all in taxes, which means by adding that person to the tax base, they are actually taking away from total revenue of the United States, even before they start participating in entitlement programs. Again, I am stuck here making the negative points of something because the media hasn't seen fit to do so yet. The reality is that this is not a magical program that benefits everyone, in fact many of the drawbacks of sending them all back, are remarkably the same as making them all citizens, yet that never gets talked about. Why is that??? Ending many jobs is EXACTLY what you are advocating, whether you know it or not. But I guess no one else has been brave enough to actually point out the economic reality of this plan.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 06:41 PM) I have a silly reason for bumping this thread, but here it is anyway. Does anyone remember the meal that V serves the girl while she's at his hideaway? IIRC, it looked like a slice of french toast with an egg, sunny-side up (or sligthly over easy) on top of the french toast. Anyways, I was talking with someone a couple days after the movie, and they said that they had something like that before, and that it was really good. Does this 'food item' have a specific name? I tried googling it, and didn't get what I was looking for. I have no idea what it is called, but I do it all of the time myself. I just order the items separately and put it together at the table.

We always do an easter breakfast... French toast, bacon, eggs, sausage. Mmmmmmmm.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Apr 16, 2006 -> 09:11 PM) This is nothing except a great comparison between the 2 managers in Chicago. The second Ozzie sees one of his pitchers show up a teammate he does something about it, where as Dusty Baker pats Carlos Zambrano on the ass and tells him to keep up the good work. It was a tough play for Iguchi and Freddy knows it he was just frustrated at the time, there will be no ill will in the future between the two. This is exactly how I see it. Freddy was mad in the moment, and you can hardly blame him. If they talked to each other, this is so not an issue.

In honor of today being tax day, I would like to take this opportunity to declare that I don't feel like paying taxes anymore. Yup, I'm 32, and I think I have paid into the system long enough. I'm done. Also I think that whole paying for health care thing, yeah, the government should take care of that too. Plus there are a couple of other laws that I am pretty much just sick of following... I don't think I am going to bother with those either. And in conclusion, I am waiting for my reward from all of you taxpayers for doing so... Is this really what it has come down to? This whole debate is maddening. We are literally punishing people who behave legally in this country to pacify basically one race in our society. The government is ready to punish all poor people, taxpayers, and legal immigrants immensely. Don't like the USA immigration laws? Don't feel like doing the paperwork, or waiting through deadlines? Come here illegally, eventually there will be enough of you that you will get made legal again. We made this same mistake 20 years ago in 1986. We rewarded 3 million plus people for breaking our laws, under the guise that this would fix the problem. Well guess what, 20 years later we are looking at 12 million people, and the "solutions" they are looking at this time still don't hold any water, and it doesn't take a genius to figure out that we are going to run into the exact same problem again in time. Also I have yet to see one single politician tell me exactly how the country can afford this. We keep getting told that if we actually enforce our laws (silly thought) that wages would explode and jobs wouldn't get done. What I have yet to see anyone discuss is the fact that there is no way around the fact that this is going to cost the country more money in the long run. I know that it hasn't been said yet, but if the tax payers of the USA are broke into 5 groups based on their incomes, the bottom two brackets actually have a negative tax rate. Because of deductions, credits, and things like the earned income credit, they actually don't pay any money in taxes, in fact they make a net and gross profit off our progressive income tax system. I'm not even saying that they just get back everything they pay in during a year, they earn money. We keep getting told the people who would be ushered in as citizen through the guest worker program are by and large the working poor of the US. For the most part at least the anectoal evidence presented in the press shows that the vast overwealming majority of the new potential citizens are going to fall solidly into the lowest quartile of income earners, meaning we are not going to be adding to the income tax roles, by and large we are going to be subtracting from it! Also with the US looking at millions upon millions of more working poor people to add to the country, how are we going to maintain our social welfare systems for the people who currently depend on them? There is also immencely clear common sense that saids it would be the lowest income earners who depend on things like welfare, WIC, medicare, medicade, social security, and other US government programs. So what happens to these programs when we add potentially 10 million or more people to them? Quick recap, all of the sudden we have the room to have less tax money paid into the system, plus majorly expand our entitlement programs for 12 million new citizens? What happened to all of the budget hawks on this subject? The same people who remind us seemingly daily about the mounting budget deficits and debt have been eeririly silent while we are looking at the biggest addition to the USAs entitlement programs in the history of the country? Most of all, why aren't the working poor of the United States being told that their very well being could be in danger because they will now have to either share their benefits with millions of more people, or without incredible budgetary increases (ie the demon deficit spending) face the potential collapse of these programs? I have seen numerous articles about the legal workers at Wal-Mart's plight because they are forced to use these programs, what is going to be said for the workers who by and large make even less than those WMT workers, and have even less benefits by and large than these poor people do now? Also one more thing I haven't seen discussed to any extent yet. We keep getting told about the wage inflation that would occur if we sent back all of these workers who are willing to do the jobs that no one else will do, and doing it for less than minimum wage. When we make those very workers, citizens, they aren't going to be making less than minimum wage anymore are they? They now would have the legal standing to turn in all of those employers who are illegally subverting the US's and OSHA employment laws, so how is it exactly that we are going to avoid large wage inflation in key sectors such as food production? The answer is we are not. Only one side of the story is getting told in the media, and on here to some extent. Folks we are looking at significant wage inflation in one form or another in any sector where the prevailing wage is less than the current legal US minimum, if any action is taking place other than the status quo. There is no chance that legal citizens will pick fruit for $2 an hour today, what makes anyone believe that newly minted citizens will continue to be used illegally, when they would have the legal recourse to actually fight that wage, instead of knowing that fighting their wages would most likely earn them a ticket back to their place or origin? The answer is there is zero chance of that happening. Why is only the one side of the story being told there as well? In conclusion, as usual I am disappointed in at best the laziness of the media, if not the outright one sided reporting being done on this issue. There is such a major lack of information, and as usual I am disappointed by the way this has been portrayed by our politicians as well. As usual the budget hawks are missing the boat, because there is nothing being said by them about the legitimate concerns here. Also not being said is that there has been no movement to fix they key part of the problem, and that is the fact that there are no penalites for being in the US illegally, in fact there are incentives. There is gainful employment to be found, social programs to be utilized in some states, and if you wait long enough eventually the years of illegal behavior are rewarded with citizenship. Do you want to end illegal immigration today? One provision would do it. Fine companies who hire illegal labor $50,000 per illegal hire, and give some one the resources to enforce the new law. I guarentee you that the incentives to hire illegal workers under the table would quickly disappear with those kinds of finds looming overhead. We don't need bigger walls, or amensty programs, or guest worker programs, we need to remove the incentives for being in the US illegally, the biggest of which is gainful employment. If the US were to ACTUALLY address that one issue, the rest of the issues surrounding this, would quickly disappear. but as usual, the big picture of this issue is totally being missed, and I have no doubt my kid child will be wonder WTF we were doing in 1986 and 2006 by repeatly missing the boat here.