caulfield12

disproportionately for the bottom 80% of the population, and financed it largely by taxing the top 20% at a higher rate? Would that be ANY different than the current reaction of Democrats/liberals to Trump's tax law, and why? Study after study have shown that by giving the poor and middle class more money (disposable income) in their pockets, they'll directly inject it back into the economy and also pay down debt to a much larger extent than the positive economic impact of gifting it to the rich/elites. The middle class and those living in poverty might also wisely invest it into their children's education/s, which sociologists point out is the only realistic way to break poverty cycles, for example...or into saving some of it for retirement (putting it back into the economy by buying shares). Yes, stocks are up (under Obama, 250%, Trump around 30%). But 80 percent of the value is held by the richest 10 percent. 84% of the tax cut benefits are going to the Top 1%. We can throw out any numbers we want, like 52% have "stock market investments/shareholder class" all the way up to 63% having some type of 401-k/pension/mutual funds/Roth/IRA/profit-sharing or stock option plan, but the fact is that almost all of the benefits of the new Republican tax bill are going to the richest Americans, leading to more and more inequality/unequal distribution of wealth. But why is this good for America, exactly? Studies of the 2004 tax cut confirm exactly what economists predicted is already happening: Repatriated earnings (think Apple here) were used largely to repurchase stock. The obvious problem is that stock buybacks aren't as productive as ordinary business investment, research and design/development, capital expenditures, improving technology/efficiency/productivity and 2) they inflate corporate earnings (misleadingly) per share by reducing overall share count, eventually leading to a recession. Rewarding existing shareholders for remaining loyal and faithful shareholders would certainly be argued by many to be a productive business investment, but, once again, almost all of the benefits are going to the wealthiest 10% of Americans. So if we argue that roughly 20% of the benefits are trickling down to middle class tax cuts AND employee bonuses/raises/minimum wage increases, we have a bigger question... Why wouldn't Democrats simply turn around and "victimize" the rich by doing the exact opposite somewhere down the line? To many, Trump's policies are, at their heart, about rewarding his family and his base of support...so, wouldn't doing the opposite pretty much ensure that the majority of Americans would vote for Democrats? That 80% of the benefits should flow to the middle class/poor and only 20% of the benefit to the rich/corporations? Since the corporate taxes are already locked in, wouldn't it be natural to turn around and continue this "class warfare" thing we've got going on going all the way back to the Clinton Administration in the 1990's and realistically even earlier. One COULD argue that this was exactly what Hillary Clinton was attempting to articulate in 2016, but it didn't come across as genuine or authentic because she and the Obama admin were too cozy with Goldman Sachs/Wall Street and the corporate elites to be believed or trusted in the same way that Bernie Sanders was... https://finance.media.yahoo.com/news/tax-cu...-185047405.html

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/18/politics/kfi...adio/index.html Head of the Corporation for National and Community Service (former Navy SEAL, Trump booster) out over racist/anti-Muslim/sexist/anti-gay comments. You can't have someone in charge of AmeriCorps/Peace Corps/VISTA...basically, our Federal government's domestic and international outreach in terms of volunteer/service workers represent such distasteful viewpoints.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 05:51 PM) My response was in no way lazy. Not sure why you have to call it that when you can just give your opinion. Liberal is not a snarl word. I am a liberal. In the classic sense. If I called all liberals "commies" every time they had a different opinion that would be more like calling someone alt-right. Also the alt right wasn't created decades ago. Do you know people in real life that call themselves alt-right and are proud of it? I certainly don't. I would have no idea who Richard Spencer was if I only took in right wing voices. People on the left talk about him far more than I've seen anyone on the right. Look at Spencer's academic background. You will be shocked. Much smarter than Trump.

Greg, it's not so complicated. We're supposed to have EQ and sense when someone is hesitant or not completely comfortable. That's when you stop whatever you're doing and ask, "Is that alright?" or "Are you okay?" Or you simply should be so confident of yourself that you allow the women to lead the physical interactions in the beginning stages of a relationship, until you're 100% sure about how she feels about you, that she's "into you" or whatever phrase people use these days.

That’s not really hostage any more, with the government report recently arguing that the Program more than pays for itself...saving money over time. Every politician should be FOR that. It’s the DACA arguments that will split The GOP Congress, Trump and his base. As soon as he legalizes those 700,000, Trump is afraid he’ll lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of his core base. Then you have the hawks who can’t stand CRs and would have you believe the military’s on the verge of collapse with this short term funding strategy.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 04:04 PM) looks like they don't even have 50 votes in the Senate Down already 2-4 votes on the GOP side, and then McCain/Flake are always wildcards, McCain especially over military spending. Then you have Collins/Murkowski. If they have truly drawn the line on DACA, it’s going to be a crazy week ahead of us.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 03:57 PM) And the right fielder whose ceiling is "God of Thunder". Palka?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 03:59 PM) Those two big market teams have exactly one World Series appearance this decade. We had Kansas City one run away from back to back titles, then Cleveland was that close to winning a title, so it's not like the big market teams are the only ones winning. Houston is a big market, but never near the largest payroll, and they just beat both of those unstoppable large morket forces. And it's not like the other owners don't have any money to spend, they just choose not to. The owner of the Pirates is a billionaire but god forbid he spends some money to win more baseball games. Each owner just got a $50 million check from that Disney Tech sale but I doubt any of that goes to their payroll. Same case with Pohlad and the Twins...and the White Sox until 2006, with the exception of the Belle deal. It’s actually not so dissimilar from political arguments about tax cut/government subsidy effects? Do they go to the workers or owners? The Marlins are the prime example right now, and they managed two World Series wins as well. The Yankees have only won it all once since that 90’s dynasty. A’s and Twins both made runs...Twins might be close to doing it again.

Maybe just five years of control...and shorten the truly cheap years by one? If you go to 4 years to true free agency, the fans of young players/prospects will have a harder time attaching themselves (and their optimism/hope) to an extended rebuild.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/18/g...ublicans-345532 13 Dem votes in the Senate seems an impossible get after last week...insulting Durbin and Graham

Not alt-right. Nationalist populism...or is it populistic nationalism?

Rutherford’s still in the 60’s at pipeline, isn’t he?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 01:12 PM) I disagree with every point you made there. There is very defined statistical evidence of increased participation in white supremacist groups and sites. The Alt right "talking points" are also very clearly defined and if they are repeated verbatim as someone's opinion then it is very clear where those viewpoints came from. Calling the identification lazy and intellectually weak is in itself lazy and weak. The only thing weaker is mindlessly chanting USA, USA, USA and playing Lee Greenwood songs...

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 12:49 PM) Nobody cares about the alt-right. It's not a clearly defined thing. It's a snarl word for the intellectually weak to use when they don't want to address points and would rather gang up. Respond to people's specific opinions. Don't just hand wave them with some media created narrative that there is some wild surge of white supremacy in the USA. It is interesting that there was an increase in murder by white supremacists. It would be interesting to see the whole picture on how specific demographic groups murder other groups on a rate basis. Oh and by the way, this backwards thinking that we need to give certain groups more on account of predispositions or hold them to lesser standards in education/employment is only going to create more "white supremacists" or people with white skin who have pride in their culture and are being penalized because this country was founded and ruled by white people for the great deal of its history.. The whole white privilege argument doesn't go over well when you consider there are more poor white people in this country that any other demo. I understand on a rate basis that white people are less likely to be poor than some other demos but that still doesn't change the fact that there millions of them in poverty who are getting the same bucket treatment of condescension and shaming about skin color. If you believe that Affirmative Action or unions are the primary reason why white people are in poverty, you’re missing the point. You might as well blame opioid addiction, or oxy. It’s all about skills/education/work ethic. Whites are losing because people from China, India, South Korea or Singapore are willing to work twice as hard for 25% less pay. It’s simply a matter of efficiency and productivity. The “dumbest” kids at our school all get at least 700 on SAT math and are ridiculed for that. While you’re at it, maybe you can come up with some education/tuition reforms or training/retraining ideas that can benefit all Americans across socio-economic groups, instead of seeing things mostly through a frame of racial or religious grievances? As far as I have observed, those same white people who complain the most often want the cheapest possible goods at Wal Mart or Costco that are manufactured primarily in the developing world...those jobs are never coming back,unless we’re willing to pay 25-50% more for those same products to be made in America.

I would rather have Willy Garcia than Engel/Tilson...at any rate, all those guys and Cordell will get their chances, just like even Jacob May did a year ago.

QUOTE (Whitesoxin2019 @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 12:06 PM) Sorry being bombarded and really need to get back to work. To answer your question. AP reports but I still watch major networks cbs, nbc,abc even though I don’t automatically trust initial reports. Your AP/UPI reports are from 1953-1960. How about explaining what DeVos, Scott Pruitt, Dr. Tom Price, Javanka, Zinke, Rick Perry, etc., have done to benefit America?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 11:56 AM) explain why 1) a trade deficit with Mexico is bad 2) how lessening the trade deficit will offset government spending I would love to see the right argue why it’s in the interest of all these countries like Mexico, Canada, South Korea and China to renegotiate trade deals with us in a bilateral fashion. Surely, the best negotiator in the history of the world and smartest president could successfully get at least one country in the world to voluntarily help us out, right? What are Ross, Lighthizer and Navarro actually doing? They’re all about as useful as Omarosa or Kellyanne.

QUOTE (Whitesoxin2019 @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 11:36 AM) Nobody seems to get the point. As long as the media is s*** and people feel they are being lied to Trump will thrive. I mean come on folks. If Trump is as bad as we think he is why not play it straight above the fence? Why use photo shops, edit videos, peer pressure, shaming etc etc Nobody can answer this, specifically the tragedy that is CNN. I think they only help trumps popularity. “But FOX news” yeah they are s*** too. But I can tell you from an independent point of view CNN takes the cake. Stick with the issues guys. I was more inclined to vote liberal 20 years ago but all the white shaming, media deception, gang mentality, violence (yes I do think the violence from antifa is severaly underreported), I see them as communists. Say what you will about Trump, but until these things get fixed y’all don’t have much leg to stand on. Also a new trend I noticed with the left side is lack of compromise. You won’t admit being 1% wrong. It would be refreshing to hear if trump ever does something good because he has done good. I don’t agree with all the bullet points under the fake news awards but a more than a few items stick out in my mind as unquestionably true. The shame with networks like cnn though is even if he does lie, how can I believe it? Name all the commentators who defend the left/liberal on Fox, lol... Antifa has more members than the NRA, surely that’s underreported. Please list all the compromises the House and Senate have been willing to make in the last year that could legitimately be considered bipartisan. If the American people feel like the Congress is (not) going overboard, like the Clinton impeachment or Gingrich Revolution, you will see the results in November. What has Trump done well that more than 35% of the people agree with? Surely you believe he’s 100% responsible for the stock market run up. What else? I guess you’ve already forgotten the list that goes longer than the fake news of racist comments Trump has made. Trump has done nothing to unite the American people, and everything, starting with the American Carnage speech by Bannon and Stephen Miller on Inauguration Day, to deliberately divide Americans based on dog whistle identity politics. He and Javanka only care about themselves, their brands, and being the most famous and talked about persons on the planet on a daily basis. They make Barack Obama positively look like Billy or Franklin Graham on religion. Does that same description also apply to Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, etc.? Maybe Andrew Jackson or Woodrow Wilson, without the intellectual capacity of either...

Would love to hear opinion of independents and Trump voters on this...fake news! A year into Donald Trump's presidency, global confidence in US leadership has fallen to a new low, according to an opinion survey conducted across 134 countries. The Gallup poll puts global approval of US leadership at just 30%, slightly behind China on 31% and only three points ahead of Russia. Germany is now the top-rated global power in the world, with an approval rating of 41%, according to the survey. The US rating is down nearly 20 points from the 48% approval rating in the last year of President Barack Obama's administration, Gallup said. It's also four points lower than the previous low of 34%, seen in the final year of George W. Bush's presidency. By comparison, in Obama's last year in office the United States led Germany by seven points, China by 17 points and Russia by 22 points, according to Gallup. "This year marks a significant change in our trends," said Jon Clifton, global managing partner at Gallup. "Only 30% of the world, on average, approves of the job performance of the US's leadership, down from 48% in 2016. "In fact, more people now disapprove of US leadership than approve. This historic low puts the US's leadership approval rating on par with China's and sets a new bar for disapproval." http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/18/world/us-sli...intl/index.html

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 08:01 AM) Historical, landslide victory? He lost the popular vote by 3 million and had a narrow electoral college win. They're lying in the FIRST bullet point. They were counting by counties, lol...

Kelly is doomed now as Chief Of Staff. Pulled a Bannon, publicly undercutting him on the wall issue. If he and McMaster both leave, God knows what disaster will befall the country under Javanka.

Krugman might have believed that, but so did many non Nobel Laureates around the world... Trump’s 2000 + lies

I don't think they want to risk an injury to Jimenez playing him in CF (might feel more pressured to make a play he shouldn't try to make). The other main issue is his limited range out there isn't going to be overcompensated for by this arm...think Viciedo trying to play that position, or Nelson Cruz. Highly doubt Engel's even around to be the 4th outfielder at that time, we'll probably have a few more veterans in the mix with experience coming off the bench in big situations offensively or defensively.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 17, 2018 -> 10:32 PM) Has an entire conference ever made the tournament before? Iowa State is a legitimate bubble team. Not with their conference record and 7 losses already with 2/3rd's of schedule to go. Got blown out by 20+ at TCU tonight. I think the closest was the ACC, when they had 8 schools and got 7 in (it was definitely at least 6). The Big East had 11 in 2011. The "modern" ACC, the most they've gotten in was 9.