Jack Parkman

I've looked into it-places with a low cost of living have a much smaller job market. I need the biggest job markets I can get due to my disability. I really want to experience living outside the Chicago area, but it would have to be the right place. I don't want to live in a high-stress area if I can avoid it.

That is what I do part-time and I rely on disability for the remainder of my income. It really doesn't make sense for me to do anything else unless my quality of life goes significantly higher. I'm not an idiot and I've done the math. I'd need a 40-45K/year job to become independent. It isn't cheap here. RE: the military-If i didn't have both physical and mental health issues, both me and my best friend were planning on joining the Navy as kids. My best friend's dad did 6 years enlistment and 25 years in the reserves, and reached CPO before he was forced into retirement due to illness. When I started having issues in my early teens that plan changed, because I knew I couldn't get in. I was smart enough to do any job, and would have had a pretty high chance of staying out of harms way.

For me, Yeah...I can't speak for him. I went to a loan calculator and figured it out. You can't account for thinking that $400/month is no big deal when you believe you'll be making $3500/month after taxes but you're only taking home $800. I mean those who did get jobs in petrochemicals were making 70K right out of school. Most of my classmates ended up going to grad school because the job market was so tight in 2011-12. I had no shot. I didn't know what I was doing.

No kidding, I had the attitude of working in petrochemicals in their safety dept, and as I got the experience I could go do what I wanted. I was prepared to work there for the first 5 years of my career. I knew what I was getting into. The only way that I could have stomached working for them was in safety/EPA compliance. The issue was that I gave off the vibe that I really didn't care for Petrol companies. I was involved in plenty of industry meetings, talked to professionals, etc.

None are completely blameless, but I'd put more of the onus on the government and modern day capitalism than anything. I went to a JuCo for my first two years, was able to get a 50% academic scholarship. I still had to finance 35K in student loans, and my parents covered 50% of my costs remaining after the scholarship. I only paid for room and board for 1/3 years at university, and the only reason I did that was because I had an 8am class that I would have had to commute to 35th and State for class when I live in Elgin. I did it once before and it was brutal. It greatly affected my grade in that particular class, because I was fatigued from lack of sleep. You want to know what was crazy? It was actually less expensive for me to attend IIT after the scholarship than either UIC or U of IL. I also later found out that it would have actually been more prudent to go to university immediately because I could have received a full ride due to my ACT score(I got a 31-on the 1st try) I thought I was making smart decisions but in reality I was making dumb ones.

I don't think people are content working dead-end jobs. I'm certainly not. People aren't going to uproot themselves and jeopardize their income stability for a zero to marginal increase in quality of life. There are many factors in switching jobs or changing careers. Speaking of education: I have a BS in Chemical engineering and couldn't make a career in the field work because of my Asperger's. There is a huge demand for people on the autism spectrum in the Software Development industry, and they have programs that would give me the support I need to be successful. I have looked into programs, and I don't have the skills to do it. I pay roughly 50% of my monthly income for my student loans, and the only reason why I'm doing it is because of the horror stories I've heard about procrastinating with them when you can't find a job. I live at home, mostly because of these two factors. I would love to go back to school and get the skills to become a software engineer, but.....I can't justify the investment because there are zero guarantees even with these programs. They say that people "have access" to education but when you're in a situation like mine, where you're making less than minimum wage, already have student loans, and your field is dying due to its reliance on fossil fuels(I didn't get into Chem E to work for Shell, Exxon or BP-I got in to help with the green revolution, and that failed as well) And you have a clear path to a successful career but in reality the education I need is way too expensive. Not to mention that my federal loans carry a 6.8% interest rate and new loans go for over 8%, I really can't afford it. These programs didn't exist when I was in college in the late 2000s and even the earliest ones started after I graduated. If I would have known about them, I would have gone for this line of work. The first time I got hint of something like this, I was already out of college for a year and a half. They started popping up in 2014. In reality, I don't have access to the education that I need to be successful. It wasn't because of any choices that I made or didn't make, it was all about graduating into the teeth of the great recession and the lack of information available to both individuals and employers about where people on the spectrum are best able to acclimate to a NT workplace. It was shitty timing and bad luck. Also, I wasn't mature enough emotionally to handle full time work when I was in my mid-20s either. If I had a time machine I'd go back and do a lot of things differently. (mainly-go work until I was emotionally mature enough to handle a"real job" and had all of the information I needed to be able to prepare for a successful career) But I don't and I'm left to pick up the pieces from here.

It seems you haven't learned anything from our conversation over PM, where I told you that some people(myself included) don't think of charity as charity, but instead as a "pity gift" given to someone that is looked down upon by the remainder of society. If you don't want your tax money going to help certain people, then you don't value them as human beings. Whether that means financial support, job training, investment in education, etc. It says more about our society where we put our tax money than where we give to charity. IMO, if you don't want your tax dollars helping poor people, then you dehumanize them.

700 and Eloy

Thread title says it all. Was thinking we'd sit lower corners for $20/ a piece. Maybe if he gets called up during a road trip it would give me enough time to get group tix for a discount.

I am Sonic the Hedgehog. Go away egghead!

For the love of all that is holy in baseball, please tell me I'll never have to watch a pitcher hit again.

BTW, I like your handle. Durham reminds me of a lot of players from that era: My favorite semi-obscure players to remember from the mid-late 90s include Norberto Martin and Chris Snopek. I still have vivid memories of Gene Honda calling those guys as they walked up to the plate.

People in Springfield and Decatur are close enough to make that trip. It is only an 60-90 minutes from there to St. Louis. Peoria is 2 hrs away so if someone really wanted to go to a Cardinals game they could pull it off....It is no different than traveling to a Sox game from where I live in Rush Hour lol. They probably make up the difference with the rest of IL. Anywhere south of I-80 and west of I-55 and you start getting into Cardinals country. They also draw in Iowa as well.

I disagree. The Sox should get that pick and the Cardinals shouldn't. I'd argue the Cardinals have a bigger fanbase until I'm blue in the face. They also have most of MO and downstate IL. I've also spent plenty of time vacationing in northern Arkansas and if there are people with baseball hats there, they're Cardinals hats.

I'd agree with that. I still don't buy it. I just find it really hard to believe......Maybe it is just horribly skewed in Kane, NW Cook and Dupage where I spend most of my time. I will say this......In 2010 the Sox were in the middle of their 22-5 run and they were doing the "score search" for a new host. The score was the Sox flagship at the time and they asked Connor McKnight and the other guys what they would lead their show with. They all said the Sox and Mitch Rosen said they were wrong. Rosen said that because Pinella was on the hot seat, that they should lead with Cubs talk. He went as far as to say that Sox talk should be avoided unless they're in the playoffs or making big news. This was shortly after the Hawks won their first cup btw, and all that was being discussed was the Cubs and Hawks cap issues. I miss when they'd talk Hawks on the radio. If there was actually a split fanbase then the Cubs/Sox talk time on sportsblab would be split relatively evenly. I get excited when they talk Sox because it is so rare.

No kidding. I'm just really into baseball and it is my favorite sport. I don't go to a lot of games because of my personal situation, but I try to make it to as many as I can afford. I've been making a point of it to support the Sox through the rebuild as best as I can and rock the gear as if they were winning because they finally decided to fucking do one, something I thought I'd never see until JR kicked the bucket.

Yes, but how often does that happen? There is about one team that has pulled it off for an extended period of time in baseball: The Braves. They also had the fortune of dealing with abnormal aging curves due to the Steroid Era. That kind of sustained success will probably never be duplicated again.

I still rock my Sox stuff when not going to games, idgaf. If you're not going to rock the gear all the time you're a fairweather fan anyway.

Wow Tony, we're in 100% agreement here.

The luxury tax is acting as a de facto salary cap. That only works that way if you could spend unlimited dollars. You can't. There are caps on the draft, International spending, etc. It is going to work differently from this point forward. Sustained Success is a myth. You can draft a core group of players, ride them out for a decade or so, but then after that all bets -re off. This is going to be cyclical similar to the NHL. Good for 7-10 years, mediocre for 2-4 years, then start the rebuild process over again. That is how it is done now. Don't like it? Don't watch sports.

I don't buy it. I could have bought it in 2005-06 but not in 2019. The last decade and a half has turned the Sox into the Mets.

They absolutely are the Mets. 100% there is nowhere in Chicago that is Sox first, outside of Bridgeport. I vehemently disagree with that article. I don't believe one bit of it. That may have been true in 2006, but the success of the Cubs in 2007-08 and then again from 2014-present has shifted the landscape drastically.

But if you're going to suck again anyway, you have to REALLY suck. That is how they got this far in the first place. If you're a smart fan you realize this. You maximize your window, then Tank and start the process over again. If you're a fan of the name on the front then the name on the back shouldn't matter. You should want what is best for the name on the front. If that means trading Bryant with a half season left on his deal, should he bounce back a Cub fan should want them to do it.

Hahaha. I went to grade school in Batavia and I grew up most of my life in Elgin. Sammy blew up around 95-96 or so and that is when I started playing little league and paying attention to stuff. The only reason I'm a Sox fan is because my dad grew up in Bridgeport and hates the Cubs with a passion.

Thanks. I'm not defending ownership either, as revenue sharing dollars are ridiculous. The fact remains that the Cubs print money and the Sox don't. Ever wonder why? There are a lot more fans of that other team than the Sox.