StrangeSox

another blown call1 how much do NBA refs make?

QUOTE (Felix @ May 18, 2011 -> 08:40 PM) Exactly. This is pretty laughable, guys. I dunno, the announcers are even calling out some terrible calls. Just because its even doesn't mean its good officiating.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ May 18, 2011 -> 04:57 PM) GAME 2 HURRRRRRRR I love these posts next to your avatar

To follow up on Balta's post in the ® thread, Newt: "So let me say on the record, any ad which quotes what I said on Sunday is a falsehood." lulwut? "Never Intended to be a Factual Statement" is the new Republican meme?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2011 -> 02:26 PM) Plus if you ever want to see a pic of Kap in a veil, I have it. Why isn't this your avatar?

McCain responds to Santorum's claim that he "doesn't understand how enhanced interrogation works:"

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2011 -> 01:42 PM) Maybe. You could be talking about people from work, people from church, moms bridge group she had to invite etc being ahead of you for different reasons other than how good of friends you are (or aren't). It isn't literally a friend ranking list from 1 to whatever. Its stupid, but it is how the game is played. We made an elaborate spreadsheet with quantitative rankings in 18 categories. Invites were decided based on numerical outcomes. Pitty her aunt got left out, but her GAR (gift above replacement) just really dragged her down.

If the emergency power systems had worked, this all would be a non-issue. US regulations on back-up power are much more stringent and generally decades ahead of where the Japanese were.

Scott Walker, Man of the People, cracking down on unconstitutional visitation rights for homosexuals.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 17, 2011 -> 08:34 PM) well we already know how it'll go next year, the republicans will want to extend them all again, Obama will talk about why that's a bad idea and then they'll extend them all again

QUOTE (Tex @ May 17, 2011 -> 01:46 PM) Would you want your state to use every option possible to keep jobs in your area? Absolutely not. That would include gutting environmental, workplace safety, liability, operational safety etc. regulations as well as giving them enormous subsidies or tax breaks.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2011 -> 12:49 PM) -Price point doesn't matter. Again, cost structure doesn't care where the costs come from, or at what price point they come in at. If you change costs, you change final price, and you change production. None of the political party lines matter here. This introduction to high school economics we are talking about here. These aren't rules which are negotiable based on your party. To me, your line of reasoning boils down to subsidies (or lack thereof) not actually affecting their profitability at all. If the subsidies are there, prices will drop and their profits will stay at x%. If subsidies disappear, they'll simply raise prices to a level to maintain profits of x%.

Bono?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 17, 2011 -> 11:28 AM) We're on the verge of winning it all without him and you'd get rid of everyone for one guy? I'd disagree with that move. Especially after one of the biggest factors in Sunday's game was their strong bench and their ability to rest their starters.

QUOTE (daa84 @ May 17, 2011 -> 09:24 AM) I obviously absolutely love Barkley...but this comment is really, really dumb. I know hes just trying to give the current bulls their props, but yeah the bulls ONLY had michael (9 time first team all defense), Scottie (8 time first team all defense, 2 time second team all defense), and a guy who will get into the hall of fame purely because of his defense in Rodman (7 time first team all defense, 1 second team) and Horace who was himself a 4 time all second team defensive player. Has he forgotten that the bulls held Malone and Stockton and company to 54 points (then a record low for ANY game played) in game 3 of the 98 finals? But yes outside of ONLY starting 3 of the greatest defenders of the 90s (if not all time), Luc Longley wasn't the dominant inside force Patrick ewing was. BTW randy brown was certainly an above average defender, and ron harper won't be remembered as a poor defensive player by any means Just the recency fallacy. The Bulls' performance on Sunday was really, really impressive, so it's easy to remember all of the glorious details of that over what happened 15 years ago.

Also heard a report on the radio the other day that getting treatment early can reduce the risk of passing it on to a partner by 95% or so.

But right now, the Saudis are cutting oil production, claiming that the market is over-supplied. Ed Wallace was on Here & Now a couple of weeks ago and laid out the case in an editorial that the current prices are almost entirely due to speculation. If that's correct, then production subsidies won't really have an impact, right?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2011 -> 09:56 AM) Mostly anytime you have a change in fixed costs, you have a change in production and pricing. What would essentially be a new tax on business, would drive up costs. Those costs, in an industry that sees virtually no change in demand for changes in supply, would be passed on. We see it all of the time when the price of oil goes up now. Profits aren't affected at all to the negative, prices are raised instead. In an environment where there was an elastic reaction to pricing, profits would fall and prices wouldn't react nearly as much. Businesses would have to absorb the costs to keep customers, as much as they could. But how much does this really affect global oil supply? I can't imagine a US subsidy of ~$4B amounts to more than a percentage or two of worldwide oil production profits. Which means, to me at least, that'd it have little or no real impact on global oil prices.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ May 12, 2011 -> 01:19 PM) My brother works at a nuclear power plant in SW Michigan and is involved in some of the security design and some of the stories you hear about what you have to go through just to get into the plant is pretty ridiculous, along with some of the work he is doing for defense against certain terrorist attack scenarios. His company even pulled his supervisor from the electrical design team he is on to form an advisory committee that's sole focus is to answer questions that stem from the Japan Nuclear events. Nuclear power plants are some of the most regulated buildings in the world, and the sad part is that some of the new technology that would increase efficiency (and sometimes safety) can't even be implemented because of regulations in the new nuclear plants being built (primarily in the south I believe). Cook or Palisades? He probably knows the company I work for if he's involved in security design.

The article doesn't say what the range actually is. Most bees are working in managed orchards/groves/farms/etc., so there won't be thousands of cellphones around. edit: still, pretty interesting, I'll see if I can dig up the paper later. edit2: ADD to the rescue! Paper here. A cellphone left in a hive for 10 days caused total colony collapse. I've been loosely following the collapsing bee population story and there's a lot of interesting work being done.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 16, 2011 -> 03:05 PM) So, back on topic. So far 3 people have voted "Don't raise it". That effectively means that Medicare, the Army, and Social Security will stop being funded come about Aug. 1, or that the U.S. government will default on its debt. (Edit: and I should note, you'll still be paying the taxes for those programs. The money just wouldn't go out). Which do you prefer, shutting down all of those or defaulting? I don't think I've seen a response to this yet?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2011 -> 08:35 AM) They don't have to. But if they do, they'll make more money and more profits. So what's stopping them? The kindness of their hearts? edit: I'm honestly trying to understand this here, I don't have a strong background in formal economic education.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2011 -> 08:28 AM) With an elasticity of 15 to 20, almost the entire price hike would be handed to the consumers. It really is that simple. Why don't they just charge the higher price now if the market will support it regardless?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 17, 2011 -> 08:01 AM) LOL, he actually has the impression that oil production subsidies means lower gas prices. Wait, check that... he knows that is a lie, but he's playing it anyway. Someone on this very forum tried to make that argument to me

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 17, 2011 -> 08:00 AM) To be clear, I am not saying you end social security, which I feel like I have to keep reiterating. It is indeed a pyramid scheme, but I wouldn't want to pull the rug out either. Getting out of it takes two steps, and both will take a long time. First step, new money going in is put into market investment vehicles. As time goes on, the obligations are slowly replaced - owed government funds go down, invested positions go up. Once the tables are significantly turned, in a few decades, then you can take the next step and remove the pooling aspect. This will literally take 50+ years to accomplish, by the way. And any gaps, in the meantime, are filled by removing the SS cap as I mentioned earlier. But, again, it's not a individual retirement account. How does this scheme handle all of the disability claims?