Texsox

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 24, 2013 -> 03:23 PM) The headline on the thread is he's "begging for a job," which I don't think is fair. World Series manager to discussing coaching the Cubs? That's begging for a job.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 24, 2013 -> 03:18 PM) That's kind of a classless way to advertise your ballclub, your park and your prices. Pretty crazy stuff there, using Oz's name like that in the ad. Not an advertisement, a press release announcing their search for a new manager. I thought you would be excited, they are trying to get your man back managing.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Oct 24, 2013 -> 03:17 PM) That is classic. But, they better be careful about offering to cover ALL fines.

OMG this is comedy gold from the Slammers!

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Oct 24, 2013 -> 03:12 PM) Oh Christ. The Joliet Slammers are trying to bring Ozzie in as manager. http://jolietslammers.com/archives/8650?ut...w-field-manager THAT would be awesome. Canseco was offered a players contract with our local team. Against what is basically PE coaches and Walmart clerk he went 1-11 and retired again.

Ozzie, meet three time Super Bowl Champion coach Joe Gibbs. After being lured out of retirement, the three time Super Bowl Winning coach Gibbs put together an all star coaching staff, many guys who won the big one and they went 6-10 10-6 5-11 9-7 Then he retired, again. And Gibbs never was a jackass. Never caused fans to boycott games. Etc. Just winning a championship at one point in your career doesn't mean you can replicate the success at will. What makes a great coach? Great players.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 03:50 PM) Lots of people work from 16-18. Not working at home by choice is, obviously a choice. But yes, that number shouldn't include the disabled and/or I shouldn't have used the phrase able-bodied. The vast majority of that figure are though, obviously. If we are going to make any claims that it is bad that there are 90 million not in the workforce, then the assumption is everyone of those 90 million should be working. I disagree with that. I do not believe they should be in that statistic until they have completed their education. That was a 16 year old drop out is included, a 24 year old college grad student may not be. Then there are all the retireees. As people live longer the number will rise.

Oh God no. Not even for the Cubs. His career is over. Get comfortable in the broadcast booth. Host a party with Dikta and talk about what could have been.

This is one of the few guys I like better as an ex-Sox player than as a player.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 03:31 PM) From the Bureau of Big Numbers That Are Intended to Scare People But Are Actually Not Scary (aka Labor Statistics) http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/10/22/more-...orce-new-record Interesting. 16 and above. See what you think about the numbers I posted above. I counted 18 to 65, subtracted out disabled and stay at home (by choice) parents.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 01:31 PM) I figured you'd go for the "it's just a big number to scare you!" response. And include Medicaid all you want, that's a gigantic f***ing number. Goes along with the 90 MILLION able bodied people in this country not working right now. So glad we got an extra 5 people insured in ObamaCare before focusing on that number. Where are you getting that 90 million number from? 308 million Americans at the last census. 75 million under 18 34 million over 65 9 million disabled and drawing benefits 5 million stay at home parents 185 million remaining 90 MILLION seems like a too big number. I've seen estimates ranging from 150 million to 160 million Americans are working. Leaving around 30 million who may be described as able bodied not worknig.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 03:54 PM) Why are you assuming birthers are Republicans? I seem to remember that coming very loudly from the Hillary camp back in the day. And it's not the birthers you have to worry about, its all the lame-ass Dems that wanna have a 'gotcha' moment who will be complaining the loudest, but not realizing that most people just don't care. I am assuming that Republicans will vote in the Republican primaries and will be his biggest supporters for President. I could be wrong.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 01:35 PM) I'm pretty sure there is convincing data out there showing that as the cigarette taxes have gone up, more and more people have stopped using them. Aren't there a lot of factors at work here, not just taxes or have you seen research that isolates cost from anti-smoking campaigns, restricting access to smoking areas, etc.? QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 01:36 PM) If you are telling someone that because they made X amount of money you are going to take more than half of it, for the same services that everyone else is paying less for, you are punishing them for being successful. While I might want all of Mark Cuban's money, he made something, had an idea or sold something to get the money, it is his money. Not yours. Should he pay double every time he orders a cheeseburger because he is rich? Should you pay more because you make over the poverty line? It is punishment and theft if you want to take more than half. We wouldn't even have those services if we only taxed what a middle class person could afford. What you are suggesting is we tax everyone the exact same amount. The shipping clerk at Amazon and the CEO would pay the exact same total amount. Not even a percentage, because why should the CEO making $10,000,000 pay $1,000,000 and the shipping clerk only pay $1,000 for the exact same services? That's just will not work.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 10:01 AM) Rich people aren't going to stop buying cars, boats, jewelry, and vacations because they cost a few bucks more. The luxury tax on boats in 1990 crushed the industry. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1993-08-1...ilding-industry

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 06:26 AM) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-24...eath-lists.html NOw on one level I have no problem with this. End of life care is the most expensive out there. But the NHS already had one scandal where doctors were putting people on the 'Death Pathway' without even telling them or their families. I can see where people are sceptical of motives. Just remember, when you get 80+ and want that new treatment that will extend your life a few more months, there will be someone, somewhere, besides you, deciding if you can get it or not. Also, two for one! Seems that 'free' healthcare may not be sustainable, at least in England. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/he...rn-8876505.html We are very close in agreement here. The cold calous person in me says if you have the money to extend your life from 80 years 3 months to 80 years 7 months, go for it. If you don't

There are always unintended consequences. A couple requirements for a successful tax plan. Above all else, it must raise money to run the government. The problem with sin taxes, (expensive cars, boats, cigarettes, liquor) is if people stop buying those items, it eliminates jobs and doesn't raise money to run the government. I agree that we have too many hidden taxes. Gasoline taxes are incredible, every tourist area tacks on surcharges for hotel rooms and rental cars (hey, who doesn't like out of towners paying extra taxes in your town?) The graduated income tax is about as fair of a system as can be divised. A lesson that SS2k5 taught me years ago. the amounts and where it jumps up is the debate in my eyes.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 01:57 PM) Everything creates jobs. Sometimes I hate myself because I cant remember this one economist, but basically the idea was that everything adds to the pie. That a criminal is a job creator because criminals = police, security systems, jails, judges, lawyers, etc. Which is why the private for profit prison industry has been lobbying for tougher drug laws, and tougher immigration laws. Also why drug testing companies have invested tens of millions of dollars promoting drug testing individuals receiving government assistance.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 03:59 PM) Why do you want to punish the wealthy? They earned the money, why do you want to take it from them? Do they use the police more than everyone else? Use the roads? Forest preserves or County hospitals? Why do you want to use the tax code to punish people, because that is what you are saying there. First of all I reject it is a punishment to live in this country and pay taxes. There are very few places on the planet that do not collect taxes, so I reject your implication that we should not tax at all. So if you agree with me that it is necessary to tax people, then the debate becomes how much to tax and in what manner. If you think we shouldn't "punish" the wealthy by collecting any taxes, then you can stop reading here, but I really doubt that is the case. A few reasons why I believe we should revert back to the tax rates of twenty and thirty years ago. A graduated income tax is the fairest. Money that is used for food, clothing, and shelter should not be taxed as heavy as money used for a third or fourth home, European vacations, and manicures. So higher income gets taxed more than lower income. If we looked at the country that could be built and maintained based on a tax rate that just the poor and middle class could afford, we would not have the infrastructure, the military, and all those roads, forest preserves, etc. If we want a first world country, we need to collect more income than a third world country. The wealth, in most cases, came from the purchases that the middle class and poor made.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 21, 2013 -> 08:49 PM) Adding in the endorsement deals does make it a BIT more intriguing...but I still would never consider it a wise investment. There is some room in a portfolio for high risk, high reward, investments. But it would be a small amount for me and I would need some connection to the player, not some random guy.

From my untrained eye, it seems that 100 years ago it took more capital, today it takes a good idea. In other words, we've moved from capital driving success to ideas driving success, and by extension, jobs.

SS, this is more your area, but in your opinion, has the economy changed fundementaly between Carnegie and US Steel and Tumblr?

BTW, how will Republican* birthers react to Ted Cruz for President?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 11:17 AM) they will make that back when they get control of healthcare by denying benefits to old people and end of life care. Which party? The one that likes to give people things (not denying anything), or the one that likes to leave people's income in their pockets instead of taxing them? It's kind of the same argument I have about social security. Which party will let the system collapse? And my answer is always, neither one.

Which is a roundabout way back to my point. For job creation, I believe we ought to be reducing taxes on the middle class and begin increasing on the wealthiest. The best bang for the buck is having a middle class spending more money.

So no answer? Can we collect more in taxes? Can we spend less? Or is the size of the deficit the most important thing? Should the deficit be higher? Should it be higher by spending more or collecting less?