Texsox

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 14, 2010 -> 02:01 PM) Actually it was our government who protected slavery in the constitution. Valid point, but remember slavery predated the Constitution, and sadly there were compromises that were made to get a strong federal government established.

Help, what was the street game Kramer ran into that was named after the president and the street?

My high average for a league was around 180. High game 255, high series (with that game in it) 698. Rolled 12 straight strikes over two games. I wish I hadn't of noticed that.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 14, 2010 -> 11:15 AM) Yep. Government is the only solution. "Government Saves". In some instances, it has to be the government. We are a society of laws. Allowing businesses to look after themselves has led to unsafe working conditions, slavery, and a host of other problems that only government could solve.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 14, 2010 -> 07:30 AM) How many businesses are given cash in exchange for a vote? None. How many businesses are required to post notices of bids in local media outlets, announce bid deadlines, open bids publically, and accept the low bidder?

The Dems attempt, The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy failed miserably. The Republicans basically recreated Reagan and his Teflon Presidency and had it apply to ordinary politicians.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 13, 2010 -> 04:12 PM) Where did you learn how to read? He didn't say it doesn't happen, he said that it happens in government in excess a lot and they get re-elected for it, and when it happens in corporations in excess, people get fired. Of course, in your utopia world of "government is great, corporations are evil", you're going to take examples of corporate corruption and sceam the sky is falling and we need to end the marketplace as it exists. Having spent a fair amount of time at purchasing department desks, what I would call sweetheart deals, stuff the governmnent is not allowed to do, happens all the time and the buyer is rarely fired unless he accepts cash. Non government buyers can, and often do, take someone other than the low bidder. It may be the company they have dealt with on other matters. Lots of reasons, valid, and not so valid. Consolidation of vendor bases have companies knowingly paying more for items to reduce the number of vendors they deal with. Government, for the most part is not allowed to do that. Non government companies do not have to send things out for public bids, they hand it to a buyer and accept his judgement. In non government companies, buyers can and will change specs "on the fly" to complete a purchase, government buyers usually cannot. The reason there are more illegal sweetheart deals in government is non government buyers do not have the same restrictions, therefor, it is normal business and no one pays attention. What is an illegal sweetheart deal for government isn't the same for non government buyers. So any comparison is probably unfair. But you two keep hollerin'

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 13, 2010 -> 12:53 PM) Reading Dogtown which is based on the TV Show. Gets me teary eyed. Do they play poker? I love that illustration

I've been reading David Rice's Crazy Loco to my History class during our "DEAR" time. DEAR is Drop Everything And Read. The whole school stops at 8:45 and reads for 20 minutes. David is a local author, born here and raised in the town just north. Amazing how quiet they egt when we are reading something about them.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 13, 2010 -> 12:07 PM) Who is out there to give a corporation a sweetheart deal, Other corporations. Happens all the time. But why is that even important to this conversation?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 13, 2010 -> 08:01 AM) As opposed to governments who give sweetheart deals in exchange for cash? I think there is actually more accountability in the corporate sectors, because at least they have to answer to shareholders. Judging by re-election rates, the government doesn't seem to have that problem. Government giving sweetheart deals was what I was refering to. Since we started talking about private versus public in awarding sweetheart deals, of course it is more common in private. There are no laws to circumvent in private. If company A wants to spend more to order from Company B because the owner is friends with the sales rep, no problem. And when was a publically traded company ever in trouble for their buyers paying more to buy something? The government has to post notices of bids going out, they have to open the buds publically, the winners and losers will see each others bids. The difference is it really is no big deal for the non government buyer. The non government buyer also usually has more flexibility to choose a higher price vendor based on other criteria, qulaity and service for example. One area we have not mentioned is the treatment of employees. Governments for the most part do not violate labor laws. How will it be handled when a company is in violation? Or worse, company that fails, they bid too aggresively and cannot succeed? Again, I think those are growing pains that we have to work through, not reasons to stop privatization.

As far as outsourcing from public to private, as the government does more and more of this, there will be a learning curve. We will make some mistakes and there will be some major successes. The mistakes should not be a reason to stop. Blackwater may have been a mistake, but we fix that and move on. The danger I see is when connected corporations wind up with sweetheart deals.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 01:13 PM) You still don't understand the multiplier effect and how that works, do you? I do, which is why y'all worrying about a bigger government costing you money is confusing. We cut taxes and the government has more money. It multiplies. Why are you and SS worried about a bigger government costing you more money?

I was thinking a few things about this. For this country, it almost seems better if it was much, much worse. Then you get a couple ex Presidents working a fund raiser for you. Just really bad? A few bags of rice, maybe a small up tick in missionaries trying to help. But nothing close to the scale to really help the country.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 12:38 PM) Pain In The Ass. That is usually abreviated t-e-x Thought I'd do it before someone else.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 12:37 PM) Those three things shouldn't be true. Those sort of things becoming "assumptions" is a big part of the problem which leads to the mentality that governments never have to cut back. Remember governments don't exist on their own. They exist at my expense, which means that they are assumed to be taking more and more of my money, every year, and people don't seem to see a problem with that. That line of thinking just blows my mind. Times are tough, so while I cut back, the popular opinion is that the government is OBLIGATED to take more. Wow, just wow. No, you maintain if the government cuts taxes, they will have more income. So as long as we follow sound GOP tax practices, the government will grow. They aren't taking more, yet they still grow.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 12:33 PM) Wow. Just wow. This is the problem with you and people like you. Government doesn't have to be this way, yet, we've made them this way. It's EXPECTED that our government grows and grows and grows, thus by default, taking away from the private sector. As long as we have tax cuts the government will grow. You told me that.

One of the key diferences between steroids and spit balls is steroids cannot be caught on the field. Our first line to catching cheaters are the umpires. We can look at the pimples, the bulging muscles, and ornery personality and say, yep, he's on steroids, but that isn't proof. We can check a pitcher for foreign substences. And anyone that thinks this didn't make a huge impact on player's performances is kidding themselves, why else did they take them. And they knew it was wrong, why else did no one admit usage while they were doing it? "Hey, I'm Barry Bonds for Balco. The Clear™ has helped me to extraordinary results and they can for you to . . . "

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 08:47 AM) I'm Blacker Then Barack Obama LMAO! This is hysterical. If Blago was a REP, imagine how much he would have been attacked for this article. The newspapers would be calling for his exile. But he's a DEM and gets a pass.

I can't believe anyone is thinking Palin won't be the REP nominee.

The GOP gets so much mileage out of activist judges, liberal media, and oh poor me. They have no real power left in this country. The damn press has taken it all away along with motherhood and apple pie. It is an awesome strategy, I wish the dems had thought of it first. Every problem with the party, and any wrong doing by a REP is explained by media bias. It is a beautiful thing. The media has proped up the Dem party for years. I'm not certain why, that has never been explained. Kudos to the GOP. I'm not certain who came up with that strategy but it has been brilliantly used to the point where this generation will argue the point forever.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 03:35 PM) How did cheaters of today make the HOF irrelevant when it has been accepting cheaters for years? Who cheated first: Gaylord Perry Big Mac Barry Bonds Which of them is in the HOF? The saddest chapter in baseball is the current chapter where people have evolved this "holier than thou" attitude, and forget that the Hall is filed with cheaters from all eras, and that baseball needed a few scapegoats to cover up the fact that everyone was cheating. Either ban all cheaters, or ban no cheaters. It would be nice of they could go back and remove those players from the HoF, but it is impractical. Yes, mistakes have been made in the past, cheaters have been allowed in. Now we learn from those mistakes and move on without continuing to make the same mistakes. Why would anyone advocate for continuing to make the same mistake over and over again? And standing up for rules is "holier than thou"? Wow.

I really doubt he said it. LOL He may have thought it, but I doubt he said it.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 12:45 PM) Not really, we're friends back from grammar school that recently reconnected. We had a few beers recently and shot the s*** a little. Great guy and worked his way up from nothing. I don't live in his district so I can't even vote for him, but it still makes me sick how Chicago politics works. Which is why I have a ton of respect for anyone who runs for office. Including SS2k5.

Have you thought about where they will be placed, who will refill them, who will repair them?