iamshack

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 10:51 AM) 1. What gets solved by the lecture about how people need to buck up and take more responsibility? 2. It's worth pointing out this graph...of job openings versus applicants, to note that thanks to the destruction of the economy, we still have more than 2x as many applicants per job as there was before the implosion. Job opportunities do exist...but you can have a ton of great skills, marketable ones, and still have extreme difficulty in this economy. Perhaps people will buck up and take responsibility? Maybe someone will stop sitting on their ass trying to get their dream job and instead take the job that is open until they actually have a shot at their dream job?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:38 AM) If poverty really is the result of individual moral failings, then that's an accurate-but-critical portrayal of what's been said repeatedly in this thread. If you're going to attribute poverty to a lack of personal responsibility, you're just saying "lazy poors" in nicer language. At least, that's my view of things. I don't know what you're saying here. And honestly, the intellectual elitism is just dripping off your fingers right now...for some of you folks that are always out to save those less-fortunate than you...well, I will just leave it at this: it's pretty f***ing ironic.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:38 AM) If poverty really is the result of individual moral failings, then that's an accurate-but-critical portrayal of what's been said repeatedly in this thread. If you're going to attribute poverty to a lack of personal responsibility, you're just saying "lazy poors" in nicer language. At least, that's my view of things. I don't know what you're saying here. Ceaselessly ignoring the structural causes of poverty and talking only about "personal responsibility" means you're not focusing on the actual problems that need to be addressed. Especially when plenty of poor people are hard-working and responsible. We haven't had a thread on poverty, SS. We've had a thread on the life expectancy of Americans and the "wussification" of America. Neither of those, in my opinion, are subjects which require a discussion of the structural causes of poverty.

Hard to argue, perhaps except for the line about backloaded contract hell.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:18 AM) I don't view poverty as some sort of moral failing. If you want to go to an individual, case-by-case level, sure, you can probably find examples. But the problem of poverty as a whole? Never. edit: here's an interview I've found that gets into the difference in the framing of poverty being individualistic or systematic. http://newsframes.wordpress.com/2012/12/06...ty-framing-jrf/ I couldn't agree with you more. I am not so naive to believe that all those below the poverty line just happen to be all the people that suck the most at life. And I also understand the concepts of generational poverty, and how drug and alcohol addiction significantly lower your ability to escape poverty. I understand that access to quality nutrition and education are limited. I understand all that.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:14 AM) Plenty of people in s***ty situations are hard-working and responsible people. Plenty of people in great situations work no harder than them. I think understanding why is important and that blaming it on lazy poors is just a reflexive defense of privileges you've been given in life. I love how you guys have grabbed this "lazy poors" thing the last few weeks and run with it. I don't think anyone ever used that phrase, I know I certainly did not. There is a distinguishable difference between some of the attitudes in here, such as that of the OP and those who agree with him, and those of us who aren't crying out that the sky is falling, but do see a lack of personal responsibility in today's society. Sometimes, things get comfortable, and people get a sense of entitlement. I am certain there are times when I felt I was entitled for something I didn't work for. Then someone pointed this out to me and took the thing I felt entitled to away. It was then that I had to make a decision to get off my ass and work hard to get what I wanted, or work at a convenience store my entire life and always be barely scraping by. Now your response will inevitably be "there are plenty of people out there who would love to work at a convenience store all their lives so they can barely get by." And what that does is obfuscate the point some are trying to make here. There are always those that are going to have it pretty s***ty in life...that is just the way of the world. Ceaselessly pointing that out instead of focusing on actual addressable problems and issues would seem to be, at worst, at least as good a course to take as that which you and Balta seem to constantly advocate.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:05 AM) Why can't it be both individual and societal and, maybe more importantly, nothing to do with "blame" at all? Honestly, you and Balta are the ones that are always assigning blame to some larger cause, rather than actually expecting people to show some kind of responsibility on their own.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:42 AM) Like I said earlier...If you're building a bridge...you don't decide "If I put a net beneath it, some people might jump just to see what it's like" and decide you're not putting up a safety net. A good safety net is going to always have freeloaders. You can take steps to minimize it, and you should. Work requirements for TANF (which, yes, exist). etc. But you still put the net there, because you're better off if anyone who falls...gets caught before impact. I'm just curious...for you and SS...is there ever anywhere you draw the line and say "ok, at some point, a human being has to take responsibility for him/herself and actually do something"? Or are there always societal or cultural factors...someone else to blame...some government or a political figure or a study to cite?

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 11:21 PM) Their defense looks soft when i watch them on TV Well they certainly aren't the '85 Bears...but losing Talib really hurt their ability to slow down Boldin at all.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 08:41 PM) Time for the Patriots to realize you cant win a SB with a good enough defense and no playmakers on offense on the outside. I think losing Talib really hurt them...as well as Gronk, obviously. I don't think there is anything about their system that prohibits them from winning in the playoffs.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 11:05 PM) Y2hh, I didnt mean you were German that way. Just that you were likely of German descent. And I have no problem with anyone. Its the past. Hmmm...I don't think the Germans were all quite lining up like you seem to argue...many of them were really afraid to step out of line, because if you did, you ended up getting beaten and in a hospital bed somewhere. And it wasn't just Germans that were somewhat complicit in all of this...there were quite a few Americans and American politicians who did the exact same thing as the Germans did.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 03:35 PM) Jason Whitlock ‏@WhitlockJason Let's see: Te'o dictated terms of ND investigation, dictated terms of ESPN interview. But he's a clueless f--k catfished for 3 years. OK There's a big difference between him handling his personal life and his handlers dictating the shots.

QUOTE (Joxer_Daly @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 12:08 PM) Fairly uneventful weekend for me in terms of sport. Action for both Celtic and the Dublin Gaelic footballers, but preparation for the upcoming baby arrival vetoed any attendance plans. Celtic won 4-1 earlier today, Dublin in action tomorrow. I'm hoping to do a charity cycle in the summer, so I'll be out on the bike first thing tomorrow morning. That's about it really. What's on your radar? NFL Conference Championship games are tomorrow, so most here will probably be tuning into those in varying states of inebriation. The girlfriend and I are going to be cooking up some jambalaya, along with some red sangria and some kind of "fruit pizza" she is making. Thanks to the fabulous Martin Luther King, Jr. , we are also off Monday, so tomorrow should be a great day to eat, drink and be merry.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 01:12 PM) I feel the need to repeat this post from a moderator this morning, to try to stress it. Look, being a former moderator here myself, I promise, I am not just trying to drum up s*** here...but we don't need to go down this road of censoring opinions and frustrations just because a large majority of folks don't agree or want to hear them. We are better than this here. If something is getting beaten to death, avoid the thread. No one is forcing anyone to read anything. But there is no need to start handing out suspensions for people voicing their frustrations over the lack of transactions this offseason. I get wite's frustrations, but that kind of oversight is just not soxtalk.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 02:02 PM) Efforts, undertaken...by a very intrusive government. Oh brother...somebody's always gotta nitpick

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 02:47 PM) on a personal level, in your every day life, are you constantly affected by WW2? I'm just saying that on a personal level, being raped is much more impactful than WW2. but yes, I do see how my hyperbole caused that to be an ironic statement. Just backing you up a bit However, the huge effort expended by this country during WW2 very well may be a large part why you and I are able to do just about everything we do in our everyday lives, and we need to always remember that.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 02:08 PM) so ignorant. to that girl, and that girls family, WW2 pales in comparison. WW2 means jack s*** to anyone who wasn't alive at the time. No words.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 02:12 AM) He said in the interview that he "tailored" some information. If you can back and read the SI transcript that Thamel did with him in September, there are a lot of lies in it if what he told tonight is the truth. He's obviously had a team of lawyers and advisors trying to figure out a way to spin this the last several days. Seriously, "tailor" the information? Nice lawyering.

QUOTE (kev211 @ Jan 19, 2013 -> 02:48 AM) I am doing the same thing your right but at least there's some semblance of proof to support my opinion other then just looking at the data and coming up with an answer. Anyways it's probably best if we all stop passing judgement on manti, nd, and espn until this is all over Yeah, you're right...we should probably give this guy the benefit of the doubt. He surely deserves it.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 07:38 PM) What could Manti have done? "I don't want to talk about my girlfriend, it's just too difficult." NO ONE IS GOING TO QUESTION THAT. No one is gonna be like "NAH b**** TALK ABOUT YOUR DEAD GIRLFRIEND' Or he could have shared something about his grandmother! Do you realize he didn't even say "when my grandmother AND my girlfriend passed away"? This was AFTER he found out this was all a hoax, and he is still retelling stories about this. He was just loving the attention.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 06:21 PM) So TMZ is reporting that Te'o started dating a real person in November and it lasted about 2 months. I've never had a girlfriend die so maybe you move on after 2 months... You do when you never actually met her...

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 05:05 PM) Raheem Morris will interview with the Bears tomorrow Not anymore....

QUOTE (kev211 @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 05:04 PM) Yes because of your anti Notre Dame stances. There's not a single piece of evidence that points to Teo being a part of this. There's also not a single piece of evidence that this is a giant Notre Dame coverup. Look at the facts and just accept that Teo was incredibly naive and stupid. But keep thinking this is a giant ND coverup if it makes you sleep better at night. My "anti Notre Dame stances"? You don't think EVERYONE is questioning this? From what we've heard, the folks at ND have known Te'O was full of s*** since October. It has nothing to do with being a fan of ND or not. It has everything to do with people having a difficult time believing that someone could possibly be this naive, and believing why he would perpetuate this "online relationship" as some incredible love story to the press.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 05:28 PM) It's one thing for some nerd to fall in love with a girl online who he's never met but a star football player in a prestigious football school? Seems very odd. The dude could have any girl on campus that he wanted and instead fell in love with someone for an extended amount of time who's never even video chatted with? Give me a f***ing break. Well, supposedly because of the seriousness in which he practices his faith or religion, and maybe just because he is introverted, he doesn't really go out, he doesn't drink, he just lays low and stays in. While I am sure he could find a real live girl that doesn't drink or go out much, he obviously found one more easily online. I suppose if he was monstrously naive and believed all this garbage this team of con artists told him, then it is possible that all he is guilty of is hiding the fact that he never actually met her in person. Perhaps this team of con artists really did somehow convince him that she was in a car accident, flatlined twice, was miraculously saved just prior to doctors disconnecting life support, was discovered to have leukemia, went through chemo, then died the same day as his grandmother. I suppose the only thing he is guilty of is feeling as though this was something he needed to represent as a real relationship, and to tell the press about, and to embellish things to avoid having to admit he never actually met her. I have a hard time believing someone could be so incredibly naive, but I suppose it is possible.