caulfield12

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 7, 2017 -> 08:55 AM) Whether or not someone should even use a financial advisor is a philisophical question, not one for law. And while it certainly seems like a good idea to make sure advisors are acting in their clients' best interests, bear in mind that A) there are already rules to provide for that, and B) the new rule was not practically workable and would result in increased fees to the very customers they are looking to protect. Again, well-intentioned, poorly executed. How would the fees be higher compared with current practices such as churning accounts for trade commissions and convincing unsuspecting clients that paying upfront loads for mutual funds will consstently lead to a higher ROI compared to index-tracking no load funds? Essentially the model of The Mutual Fund Store, where they only make money if you make money...whatever split they charge, something like 1.5% of nav at the end of year. Most typical middle class investors don't need hedge funds...or to get involved in puts, calls, warrants, etc.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 7, 2017 -> 06:33 AM) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politic...m=.fcf0d540d539 Lugenpresse http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commenta...-honest-mistake You know things are bad when Texas newspapers are going after Spicer and Conway. http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2...=BGMenu_Article Full list of 78 supposedly underreported attacks

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Feb 6, 2017 -> 10:47 PM) Without commenting on FA salaries I often think the 162 game schedule is long overdue for a change but not sure if extended playoffs is needed . Pitchers already have too many injuries and extended playoffs would mean more short starting rotations when the 4th starter isn't usually used ( dependent on the type of series( 1/3/5/7 games). Obviously the farther you go in the playoffs means the best pitchers in the game will go through the most stressful innings . Not sure risking the health of the biggest pitching names in baseball is a very prudent idea. 1 game series seems so un baseball like when the season is based on having a great teams and a 1 game playoffs might hinge on who has the best 1 or 2 starting pitchers. Playoffs then become not who has the best team but who has the the best 2 starters and the best 2 bullpen pieces. The long season is a test of the depth of talent and short playoff series just contradict that. But I am sure if the season ever gets shortened playoffs probably would be expanded .Playoffs games generate much more revenue for most teams so why not just make it more like hockey and decrease the regular season to 100 games and have all playoff series be 7 games except the 1st round with top teams getting byes. Now that idea is too radical and would screw with the record books but makes more sense and would give teams a lot more incentive to be competitive . It might make sense to limit April and September games, but those last thirty give teams an additional opportunity to look at their 40 man roster. With content providers like cable/satellite, they want as many live games as possible to justify those packages...which of course flows from the original broadcast rights deal. 154 is more realistic, because of historical precedent. Of course, you also have add ons like WBC and games in Japan, Australia, Mexico, etc.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017...hoo&ref=yfp Reddit finally kicks off several alt-right sites/discussion boards from their forums...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-democ...-221940499.html First UC Berkeley, now he's threatening to defund the entire state of California. God knows what will happen to the Iowa AG (Trump won state by about 10%) who is joining the legal battle against him.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/epic-patriots...-155559094.html Will tennis pro Eugenie Bouchard, after losing a Twitter bet about Patriots coming back...go out with random Twitter guy sporting a Tiger Woods avatar? http://sports.yahoo.com/news/statement-mad...-004233155.html Goodell "clowned" by Pats' assistant coach. Good stuff.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 6, 2017 -> 03:55 PM) While I am clearly upset by how awful Trump is, I have to say (this seemed like the best place) that I've seen a lot of overreaction to some things coming out of the executive. I think people are so angry that they just see red. Some examples: --The financial advisor rule removal. This was a matter of pure practicality. It was well-intentioned legislation when it came out, but it was also wholly unworkable, and did not thing material to help people. Getting rid of it is not OMG THEY ARE GIVING THE BANKS ALL THE POWER AGAIN. --The rule about guns that people are looking at as if the GOP wants to give guns to the mentally unstable, is really not accurate, as was pointed out earlier in this thread. --The rule change to allow payments of more than 5k to the FSB was super-narrow and just allowed a specified set of companies to very specific business, to allow border controls to continue to function in both countries. This was not some sort of handover of control to the Russians, as people seem to think. --While there are some confimation-level nominees that are clearly and entirely not proper for their jobs (DeVos is not in the same state as qualified, Tillerson has massive conflicts of interest, the new EPA guy wants to end it), most of them are not outright jokes. And this is a CONFIRMATION process, not a popularity contest. Trump won, and he gets wide latitude to fill his cabinet, unless they are just ridiculously unqualified. Most of the nominees pass muster, so let's not scream and yell about Dems not planting a flag. Again, I think Trump has shown he's (so far at least) a disaster of a President. But that does not mean every single thing he and the White House have done are pure evil. Have the financial advisors reformed since then in largely a positive way, that encourages more competition and less portfolio churning (going to a fee for % of asset increases on a yearly basis, for example, so the interests are aligned mutually)? Many companies are keeping the changes they've made even with the rule removal. Finally, we know that almost no active manager can beat the market, that load funds generally have a hard time making back their upfront losses, that having index funds that represent bonds and stocks weighted according to your age, a mixture of international/emerging markets, value/growth, small/med/large cap, no more than 10% in any one company...all are logical boilerplate, yet how many active advisors follow this strategy if it earns them 25-50% less money in commissions? For the majority of investors under $500,000, they only need 3-4 Vanguard Index funds to capture a market return and mitigate their risk. Even if you're skeptical it was costing investors $17 billion per year (Obama admin numbers), the idea that going back to the old system will benefit the majority of small and even medium wealth investors is hard to fathom.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/politics/9th...-ban/index.html Now CNN podcasts (embedded in the story) are providing warnings that some may consider "the Daily DC" to be fake news. Surreal. So, by definition, Fox and Breitbart should have "real news" stamps on their stories??? And still trying to imagine the firestorm had Obama made those same comments about Russia and the US each having "lots of killers." It would be the American flag lapel fake patriotism story all over again.

James Jay Carafano, a Heritage Foundation analyst who worked on Trump's transition team believes that seeking deep foreign policy truths in the President's tweets and comments is a mistake. "That public persona is not strategic signaling. That is just Trump being Trump. Pretty soon, people are going to look for other things when they look at what is true strategic signaling," Carafano said. "Trump means exactly what he says, you just have to figure out exactly what he means," Carafano said. http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/politics/tru...ging/index.html

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Feb 6, 2017 -> 09:51 AM) One of Milo's cult fans shot someone at one of these protests. Shooter sent Facebook message to Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos before gunfire at UW protest, police say Not as vicious as those Berkley "thugs" setting a garbage can on fire or breaking a window.... Berkeley thugs hired by Bannon to sabotage peaceful image of Women's March and turn independent voters against Dems/Millennials/Starbucks...alternate facts?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 6, 2017 -> 09:00 AM) It is astonishing. They consistently snapped the ball really early in the play clock when all they needed to do is run out the clock and this is when the Patriots were taking their sweet ass time on all their plays and shouldn't have had enough time to even make a comeback. Then when you recover the onside kick up 28-9 you have a good 9 yard run on first down to get in FG range. On 2nd and one Matthews inexcusably holds on a running play backing them up and out of FG range and then on third and long Ryan gets sacked and they have to punt. But no matter, they hold the Patriots to a FG on the Patriots next drive and the Patriots chew up 5 minutes of clock to get only 3 points so now you are still up 16 pts with less than 10 minutes left when you get the ball back. They get to third and one and the next play completely changes the game. If they run it there and get stopped New England has less than 8 minutes to have two TD drives where they need to go the length of the field when at this point they had showed zero big play ability the entire game. And then rather than running the Falcons questionably throw but that is made even worse by the fact that Freeman somehow doesn't see Hightower blitzing from his side and fails to pick it up leading to Ryan fumbling. I honestly have no f***ing clue what Freeman was looking at. Then after the Patriots score and get the 2 point conversion, the Falcons have a good drive and are well within FG range for an awesome kicker. If you run it three times and kick an easy FG the Patriots probably burn 2 timeouts, have less than 4 minutes to go to score 10 points while they can only stop the clock twice. So after getting stopped a run Ryan loses 12 yards on a sack (even if you are going to throw why the f*** are you calling a play where he is dropping back so far). And then on third they throw it and actually have a nice gain to set up a pretty easy FG attempt for Bryant (would have been just over 40 yards) and Matthews again with a terrible hold negating the play and you end up punting. Then of course the Falcons should have intercepted the throw on Edelman's insane catch and they compounded their error by challenging it and losing a timeout (which could have come in handy when they got the ball back at the end of regulation). And then with a minute left which is plenty of time to get in FG range (especially for Matt Bryant) Eric Weems inexplicably doesn't take a knee in the end zone so instead of starting from the 25 you are pushed back to the 11. Just astonishing how bad they were and how many things they did wrong. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/thirty-one-th...-055153512.html Thirty one thoughts from a Falcons' fan

Brett, Do you believe in American Exceptionalism (like Justice Roberts, Thomas and Scalia) or in the new Trump doctrine that Russia and the US are essentially moral equivalents? Do you believe Putin would be a better leader for America than Obama?

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Feb 6, 2017 -> 05:31 AM) Lmfao. (And he didn't win with Moss) I'm drunk, but I stabd by what I said. Two things the media won't talk about that SHOULD be talked about more. Julio's catch (it'll be Edelman's that they'll remember) and Belichick nearly pulling a Pete Carroll. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/team...r-receiving.htm Yeah, the 16-0 team lost to the NYG. The next year he was out with the ACL, Cassel was QB. I'll try again. How many HoF players do you see on that list that overlapped careers? Ben Coates was a very good player, but he was at the end of his career by the time Brady was on the scene.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/201...d-reagan-214742 "Does Trump actually want to succeed?" Interview with James Baker.

Montana's cast included the likes of Roger Craig, Jerry Rice, Clark, Taylor, the West Coast Offense... Otoh, it's hard to name more than a handful of standout running backs and WR's during those 11 AFC championship games and 7 Super Bowls...for the Pats. You can argue they were both "system" QB's, but there's nobody in the world who doubted they were going to win when they got the ball to start OT. In my lifetime, Manning, Marino and Favre all rank right up there (Marino a clear third)...Rodgers is the most physically talented performer and the most exciting since Vick in his early prime...but you have to give it to Brady because of how he consistently lifted journeyman like Welker and castoff players like Moss and managed to win with all of them (not to mention getting them to buy into the team concept.)

Kelly 1 Bannon/Miller 0 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-ro...m=.c4c63512d1c6 97 companies join fight with WA and MN against Trump, including Apple, Google and Uber http://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-google...-095644535.html http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/dona...emocrats-234672 Trump sets 2020 Democratic field ablaze...any form of compromise or accommodation is out

Trump immigration ban stopped at least until Monday afternoon hearing. Appeal for immediate reversal denied. Carter, Bush and Obama judicial appointees will preside. (If case goes all the way to SCOTUS, it will be remanded back down without 9th judge, who should have been Merrick Garland.)

http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-who-s...berkeley-552577 Knowing Bannon, the left is justified in at least being skeptical where the black mask thugs even originated...and very few would be shocked if it was a set-up. According to a promotional Breitbart story that ran before the event, Yiannopoulos was going to “ call for the withdrawal of federal grants and the prosecution of university officials who endanger their students with their policies.” Which is exactly what Trump did via tweet early the next morning:: “If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view — NO FEDERAL FUNDS?” http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-who-s...berkeley-552577

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 4, 2017 -> 09:28 PM) I thought you lived in China, not Frankfort? And you voted for Trump? Sorry but can you try to use the quote button? I can't even comprehend what your posts and links say. It doesn't work well with an ipad. If you want to italicize something, you have to physically place them at the front of a quote, then delete the [/]...then you have to go in at the back end of a quote and repair it again. Not to mention the last 3-4 days my ipad keys have been "sticking" and it's not even possible to get the cursor to show up where I want on the touchpad. Then I have to deal with the VPN freezing as well at times when internet usage is high in China, so I keep ending up with double and triple posts. At any rate, I will try to reinstall the latest version of ios and reboot the system.

I voted for Trump because he was the alternative to letting a collection of free spenders, organizers, race-baiters, intellectuals, tree huggers and professional value arbitrators continue to spend our grandchildren's money. This country and this generation of voters must pay our bills and not sit around having dorm-room debates on philosophy and injustice. I voted for Trump because we can't afford another president we simply like; we need one now who does something. So, go ahead — rage, riot, demonstrate, burn, dress up, march, protest, pout, sing, make speeches, resist, vandalize and denounce me as much as you want. I am deplorable, and I am happier with my vote every day. Jeff Bust lives in Frankfort, Ill. Chicagotribune.com The fact that Trump voters still believe he or the current GOP cares about balancing the budget anymore is the hilarious part. What are professional value arbitrators, anyway? Goldman Sachs bankers? Mortgage loan companies?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Feb 4, 2017 -> 08:43 PM) I try to look for signs of improvement instead of following the status quo. I know I have brought up in the past that Avi had good success hitting with men in scoring position last year and he was passable last year in RF in his limited innings there. Also there are such things as late bloomers. Is it likely he will improve enough across the board of skills to be a decent hitter or fielder ? Most likely not but all is not lost . His walk rate also was better than the year before and when he hits it the ball does explode off his bat. He has made attempts to be better . Sometimes things just click ,sometimes not. I don't know enough about O swing or Z swing and other sabremetric things to know if there was any signs there , probably not. With few exceptions, I do not often see analysis of this nature here . Avi will get his 2-3 more months (at least) in RF or DH...not to mention Melky's spot after the deadline. That leaves plenty of playing time available if he can simply maintain a 725-750+ ops. IF.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Feb 4, 2017 -> 08:15 PM) Little of both I suppose. Type A male personalities have always bugged me with their He sucks , you suck ,aggressive Neanderthal behavior which gets even worse online where there is no fear of biting off more than you can chew. Picking on easy targets is the sign of a coward. I am delusional only thinking these types may reflect on their behavior and offer a kinder, gentler opinion which can still say he sucks in a more cerebral way. I think that's what everyone did the beginning with those guys (Avi the last three) such as Beckham, Viciedo, Danks (post surgery) or even Shields last year. After awhile, you reach an overall conclusion and are just burned out talking about such players where the returns kept diminishing. In that case, it's seemingly justifiable to move on. And it's not like we spent so much time debating our veteran catchers the last couple of years...the difference is Garcia was young, a hyped prospect with lots of potential talent (young Miggy, five tools, could play CF, unlimited power to all fields, shotgun arm) and also the centerpiece of the argument about whether Hahn really knew what he was doing or not. That all led to more poster fatigue on him. Is that being negative or pragmatic/realistic? You pick and choose your battles. In the end, even a more cerebral approach won't get you much of anything back in return for him (see Napoli, Carter, Alvarez...who actually can hit.)

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/article/N.../NEWS/170209869 Or maybe just the fact that he wants to return to Berkeley to start another riot so Trump can (illegally) threaten to withhold funding or once again publicly vilify judges (one appointed by Bush) sworn to protect the US Constitution. In reality, his only power comes from NOT being ignored, much like Trump. It's a conundrum, because not fighting hard enough for what you believe in (like the SCOTUS/Mitch McConnell) is what got us here in the first place. Lay down, and you're Neville Chamberlain. Norman Ornstein, a Constitutional scholar, just a few days ago advised the Dems to let Gorsuch through and not filibuster. But Ornstein told me that he is changing his thinking on this, after witnessing initial Trump moves such as the ban on travel from seven majority-Muslim countries and witnessing how reluctant Republicans have been to provide a check on him. He now recommends that Democrats stall President Trumps agenda by repeatedly denying unanimous consent on the Senate floor. This sounds similar to McConnells brand of obstruction, but Ornstein argues its not, because the opponent is different. We dont have a conventional president, he said. Were seeing behavior that could lead us right down the path to martial law or authoritarian rule. These are dangerous times, and you have to think through your strategy in that context. For Democrats, using leverage to pull us back from the brink of something that shatters our fundamental system is now in order. Ornstein is hearing GOP will use this strategy for ACA... Philip Klein's piece suggests GOP strategy on Obamacare similar to debt ceiling: go over the cliff, blackmail Dems to accede. Not acceptable.

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/article/N.../NEWS/170209869 Or maybe just the fact that he wants to return to Berkeley to start another riot so Trump can (illegally) threaten to withhold funding or once again publicly vilify judges (one appointed by Bush) sworn to protect the US Constitution. In reality, his only power comes from NOT being ignored, much like Trump. It's a conundrum, because not fighting hard enough for what you believe in (like the SCOTUS/Mitch McConnell) is what got us here in the first place. Lay down, and you're Neville Chamberlain. Norman Ornstein, a Constitutional scholar, just a few days ago advised the Dems to let Gorsuch through and not filibuster. But Ornstein told me that he is changing his thinking on this, after witnessing initial Trump moves such as the ban on travel from seven majority-Muslim countries and witnessing how reluctant Republicans have been to provide a check on him. He now recommends that Democrats stall President Trumps agenda by repeatedly denying unanimous consent on the Senate floor. This sounds similar to McConnells brand of obstruction, but Ornstein argues its not, because the opponent is different. We dont have a conventional president, he said. Were seeing behavior that could lead us right down the path to martial law or authoritarian rule. These are dangerous times, and you have to think through your strategy in that context. For Democrats, using leverage to pull us back from the brink of something that shatters our fundamental system is now in order. Ornstein is hearing GOP will use this strategy for ACA... Philip Klein's piece suggests GOP strategy on Obamacare similar to debt ceiling: go over the cliff, blackmail Dems to accede. Not acceptable.

Much of Robart's order appears modeled on litigation conservative states used to halt President Barack Obama's 2014 executive actions on immigration. The judge finds, much as a district court and appeals court did in that suit, that states have standing to challenge federal immigration actions that affect their coffers. "The States themselves are harmed by virtue of the damage that implementation of the Executive Order has inflicted on the operations and missions of their public universities and other institutions of higher learning, as well as injury to the States' operations, tax bases and public funds," Robart wrote. Politico.com Ah, the irony!!! States' rights stop Trump.