southsider2k5

Damn right I am. I wish I could be villified and get $14 million. I'll promise you this, when I win the powerball tommorrow, Tex can talk about how great I am, and how I deserve every dollar, and I am not greedy at all for not sharing it.

The ititial offer was like that. The last offer has been reported at 5 years $70 million all on time. And even with a number like that you can't compare someone at a $150,000 a year for a deferral and $14,000,000. That is just silly IMO.

Actually Maggs rejected the offer he has originally asked for, then the Sox tried trading him.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...-880301,00.html one snippet that jumps off of the page

I am guessing the same names would be involved, as the DBacks are still looking for 1B and SP.

Numbers are always reflective of the people who want them. The CBO always reflects the interests of those in power. With Bush in power, all of the sudden SS has added about 10 years, since Al Gore was making his statements about saving SS. So either SS has added 10 years of solvency, or someone monkied the numbers.

And yet around 7% of ML baseball players failed drug tests last year, even without being tested for Balco products or masking agents. Does that tell you how many players are juiced up?

And you are very probably right. If KW could get Vazquez and Wright for the same price as Garland and Konerko (which is feasible if the Yankees kick in cash) I would be thrilled to death, as it would leave up at least $10 millionish to spend.

Which is kinda my point. He is extremely liberal, while siting the most conservative possible economic forcast to make the basis for this arguement. He calls Bush to the matt as being hypocritical, yet he uses numbers he doesn't buy to make the jist of his arguement. He basically just painted himself with his own brush. There is no way I think that things have gotten better for SS, in fact it has be worse, yet he ignores that to make his arguement. Simply put. Pot meet kettle.

That's the deal some of us have been theorizing for months now. I would be thrilled if we added Vazquez and Wright, while subtracting Garland and Konerko. Moneywise it only adds about 6 million in payroll, which leaves up flexibility in the pen, 1B, SS, or the OF.

LMAO, ah the good old Paul Krugman. I like the part where he refers to his fix only costing .54% of annual GDP, as if to minimize the fact is he talking about roughly $60 billion a year, if we start today. Sure its not hard to come up with fiscal packages to pay for this, you just have to find the political capital to tell two generations of tax payers who are by and large convinced that they will never see this money, to spend even more than the nearly 8% of their paycheck they pay now, to a system that they don't believe will exsist when they retire. Social security is a pyramid scheme, that only succeeds when there are more people paying in, versus taking out. That's it. There is no big secret there. Plus his numbers seem fishy to me. Even reading some of Al Gore's old campaign promises, Gore is claiming to be able to extend SS through 2050 with his plan, inferring that before Bush took office, SS wasn't expected to last through then, but much a much shorter time period. Is Krugman now stating that Bush has by and large somehow fixed SS for at least an extra decade? Most sites I found claimed SS would be bankrupt much earlier than 2052. 2029 http://www.arusa.com/tmpls/sect3_2.htm http://home.flash.net/~bob001/ss.htm 2030 http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp1es.html 2032 http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/2/SS1.htm 2037 http://www.socialsecurityreform.org/problem/index.cfm 2042 http://newsfromrussia.com/science/2004/03/24/52971.html So has Bush saved SS for an extra 10-25ish years?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-041...,1,994103.story

If someone puts up a 3.50 era pitching half of their games at Comiskey, I would be thrilled.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Plus I would just think if he was juicing, he would get some results

Losing Radke will kill that pitching staff. They had 4th and 5th starter problems as is last year, if Radke leaves Minnesota they are in huge trouble.

Wino, if you are interested, NBC5 has tons of stuff on it. Lots of pictures, videos, interviews etc.... http://www.nbc5.com/news/3976109/detail.ht...994&dppid=65192

Wow, that made me kind of all warm and fuzzy inside

I am not going to speculate, but there are a couple I wouldn't be surprised to hear. I'll just leave it at that.

And winter hasn't even really kicked into high gear yet... that's what is scary.

I should have been clearer... I meant seriously hurt. None of the injuries were critical.

I have two more words World Champion and two more... Cy Young If we get this kind of a guy anchoring the staff, look out.

Wow. I am glad to hear she is still working though. I image lots of places won't be that lucky. I am just happy to see no one was hurt this time.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/hea...,1,765603.story

That is thanks? Putting the same American's out on the streets, who earlier fought in wars to protect their freedoms is thanks? I honestly believe Americans would rather pay a little higher prices for their Fords, vs working as a greeter at Wal-Mart and not being able to afford a new car at all. I completely understand the costs of protectionism. But my point is, the WTO didn't seem to care about that when picking industries that would cause the most visable damage to American politicians and industries. Collateral damage had no influence when deciding what industries to subsidize for forgien governments. It was no part of the WTO decesion, or the ratialatory tariffs, so it is essentially irrelavent to the arguement here.