Balta1701

QUOTE(beautox @ Dec 1, 2006 -> 05:30 AM) but in all seriousness I don't think Visa and the rest of the "payments industry" would let criminal organizations undermine the global economy. If it cost them money to prevent it...I wouldn't be so sure. Anyway, I guess it's probably going to be left up to me to point out that many of the same companies who design and build and sell these ATM systems are the same companies who are designing and building and selling the electronic voting machines that many places are now using.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Dec 1, 2006 -> 08:31 AM) Should be back into the 70s by Sunday. Thank God winter is almost over for me. Don't forget Tex...this is an El Nino year...so winter may well actually just be getting started, even for you.

QUOTE(ChiSoxLifer @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 11:01 PM) As I see it right now BA barely has a AAA bat. BA does play good defense but it wasn't even enough to play CF full time over a career utility player. Please for God's sake do not judge Brian Anderson's performance based entirely on Ozzie Guillen's decision making.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 1, 2006 -> 08:34 AM) Technically we could deal AJ and just sign a stud defensive catcher like Molina whose as clutch as it comes with the bat (he really is). He's just slow as mud. I've been one of the people who's been going around all fall saying that if the right offer comes along, I'm willing to trade almost any of the vets on this team in order to make the team better, so hopefully people will take note of it when I say this: If we want to be competitive the next few years, we need AJ as the catcher. Not because it's impossible for us to replace his production, not because he's such a great catcher or he's such a great value or anything else like that, but entirely because he's such a key part of this team's attitude. Bringing in Ozzie was a big step at getting away from the lackadasical Manuel years where it seemed everyone waited around for something to happen. But every one of us noticed how much of a difference it made when we threw AJ into that mix. I for one feel that if you were to trade AJ, you're basically trading away this team's balls.

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 04:16 PM) Lets just say the sox did move Garcia + Crede for Santana and Figgins even though KW shot it down, we would still need to move another SP not named McCarthy, Santana or Jose. So who would you move? If he cannot be extended this offseason...Buehrle. We can not let MB walk as a FA and only get draft picks. If he can be extended, Vazquez.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 03:47 PM) TWIW, but Peter Gammons has reported that KW has been discussing Ramirez with Theo Epstein. If the White Sox have the ability to take on Manny's contract, I can't understand why they would not spend that money on pitching AND a better OF. The White Sox still have a ton of pitching. An ungodly young, quality bullpen, 6 starting pitchers, one of whom makes the minimum, 4 of whom are under White Sox control through the end of 2008.

So, according to the House Clerk's office and some reporting by the Center for American Progress...the oath for the House of Representatives is generally taken by raising one's right hand and swearing to uphold the constitution. According to CAP and the House Clerk, no book, religious text, or any other text is actually used in the ceremony, nor has it ever been so. In other words, if this reporting is correct, this entire controversy appears to have been made-up in an effort to try to find a way to go after/smear this Congressman.

QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 12:45 PM) With his type on injury how could he realistically expect that much? Possibly signing him to an incentive laden contract makes sense, but I question whether the Sox have an interest. I have no idea how he could realistically expect anyone to give him even close to that amount. But I didn't expect Soriano to get $17+mil a year for 8 years either. This market is doing screwy things right now, so I wouldn't rule anything out. With his injury, he'll probably do like Thomas did last year...wait until the end and see what the largest deal he can get is.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 10:02 AM) According to Neyer, teams like the Royals and Drays would be interested in Haeger simply because of the low cost, and the possibility of longevitiy for their franchise. Yeah, but I for one think that just because of the type of pitches Haeger throws, he's guaranteed to be undervalued until he proves himself repeatedly in the big leagues. Teams know how to evaluate a guy who throws 170 innings with a 14-6 record and a 3.07 ERA in a hitter's park at AAA if the guy is throwing 97. But if the guy's throwing a knuckler, he automatically drops down about a dozen levels in value in any trade. I for one think that Haeger is actually an ideal guy to hang onto, because until he proves himself over a couple full seasons in the big leagues, he won't have trade-value to match the numbers he puts up.

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 09:23 AM) Chuck will get his shot this year out of the pen, i hope he sticks and some how some way finds a spot in the 08 sox rotation. If the Sox pick up another righty reliever, he likely won't get a shot out of the pen unless someone gets hurt. Personally, I hope he does stick as the 6th guy in the bullpen, he at least hinted that he could handle that roll in September, and throwing him out there gives us a long man for those 19 inning games.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 09:28 AM) Again, would it help or hurt my campaign to say that Karl Rove is the father of all douche bags? Is Bob Novak then considered the grandfather?

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 09:22 AM) I take issue with this statement. As a member of the financial service community, I have witnessed first hand the gross misappropriation of funds towards items of "desire or want" rather than "need" by individuals of lower incomes. Maybe it's because the people who talk about this issue the most have the least to worry about finances, but it would a misstatement to imply that poor people out of necessity are good stewards of their money. That's exactly what you're saying, or at least implying with your comments. Ok, sorry, I just wanted to throw that out there. In fact, in general, poor people are actually the worst stewards of their money. Not necessarily (though sometimes) through their own fault, but oftentimes because being poor is basically a cyclic process. If you are in poverty in this country, many things which make life cheaper for the middle and upper classes simply aren't available to you. First and foremost, it is difficult, if not impossible, for a person in poverty to maintain a solid credit rating, because lenders take into account income when deciding on whether or not to offer a person credit. Beyond that though, it is much, much easier for a low-income person to wind up with spoiled credit, since they have much less of a safety net in terms of savings/extra income to be used if a person does lose a job or come down with an illness. And then if a single payment on a credit card is missed, the law allows credit companies to charge massive late fees and hugely increase the interest payments on cards as a punishment, no matter the reason. Beyond that, then there's always the question of health insurance, and the fact that not having health coverage through most low-income jobs can increase the possibiliyt of losing a job through being unable to work or can inicrease the chances of a bankruptcy through again making the person unable to pay a single bill and starting the cycle up.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Nov 30, 2006 -> 09:01 AM) Will it help or hurt my election bid to say that James Carville is a douche bag's douche bag? As an undecided voter...let me be the first to say it will help.

Northside, in your tax policy post, you suggest switching to a national sales tax instead of using the income tax that we see today. I have several issues to bring up with this concept. First and foremost is the size of the tax. Many different groups have done estimates of what sort of rate the country would wind up paying using some sort of sales tax proposal. The general numbers wind up being rates that would be calculated somewhere in the 30-40% range. This poses 2 potential problems, first, and its' something you do allude to, you're basically inflating the price of most goods by something like 40% (the more progressive you try to make the system, the higher the rate has to be). Do you believe this rate would be acceptable, or would it risk doing damage to the economy beyond what you're discussing? You also say that some of the costs will be made up by reductions in the size of the IRS and Welfare, but first of all, even if welfare costs are cut, they will be made up for in lower tax amounts taken in because people still will be in poverty (perhaps moreso), and second, the cost of the IRS is virtually negligible when compared with the size of the government itself. Secondly, with a true national sales tax, there is a high possibility of fraud, given that the goods sold are only taxed at one step, and there is a 40% cost benefit associated with skipping out on taxes through illegal activity. How would your plan deal with this potential problem? Third, the 2005 President's advisory panel on tax reform looked into various sales tax options, and found that in virtually all cases, adding in a national sales tax had the net effect of reducing the tax burden for the very highest income earners, while increasing the burden on the middle class and the upper wage-earning classes. This happens because the super-rich simply do not buy enough to make up for the huge amounts they earn. Do you consider it a problem that a sales tax would give a gigantic tax cut to people with multi-million dollar incomes and a huge tax increase to people earning between about $50k-$1 million a year? If not, why do you feel the middle class should pay more taxes, and if so, can you offer a solution?

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 09:10 PM) From what I gather, a sizable percentage of members are open to trading Crede if the return package is appropriate. Doesn't mean everyone -- especially those holding sentimental value -- would approve of it, but I don't believe it'd reach the level of craziness if say McCarthy were delt. In value terms, young quality starting pitching pitching >>>> almost anything else on the diamond.

If he could stay healthy, he would be a very good option as a #2 hitter and LF. But he really doesn't solve the problem of Ozzie wanting a lot more speed, and more importantly, he is a big injury risk. If he could convince Schuler and KW that he could stay healthy, it might work out. Jermaine Dye managed to convince them of that, and it worked out pretty well...but I have difficulty believing he'll be able to do that.

Bye Joe. Thanks for the 10th inning against Cleveland. And the 9th inning against the Angels. And the first game against the Astros. And all the glove work. And the parade-singing.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 05:22 PM) Good young pitching may be > to good young hitting But Crawford>BMAC every day of the week. I'm not so sure about that personally, but I will say that BMac+Fields+Sweeney, if Tampa is even willing to take that for him (they may still not bite at that, they want a fortune), is to my eyes a lot more valuable than just Crawford.

QUOTE(fathom @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 05:09 PM) The only way I'm a fan of this deal is if we then turn around and trade McCarthy in a package for Carl Crawford. I still say that no matter how good of a player an outfielder is, young pitching is just too valuable to sacrifice in a deal like that. And that is only magnified when you throw in what the D-Rays would actually ask for Crawford.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 04:57 PM) 3. We could get Donelly. While Donelly isn't what he once was, he still gives the Sox the final arm in the pen that they are looking for. Not only is he the final arm but he's a guy who has pitched in big time situations while being a setup man and even a closer on rare ocassions so in a worse case scenario (injuries, etc) we c I for one agree that this sort of deal makes a ton of sense, but personally, I think a better option than Donnely is to look at one of the former prospects the Angels have soured on, specifically Dallas McPherson. He is at least a 3rd baseman by trade, he's a lefty batter (which means if necessary he could platoon with Fields), he has a little more ML experience, he's not going to be playing anywhere for the Angels this year as far as I can tell, and he does still have a high ceiling if he can ever stay healthy. Furthermore, I for one am still happy sticking with the knuckleballer out of the bullpen as the 4th righty and 6th guy out. As we all know, Ozzie hardly ever uses his bullpen, so it's going to be difficult for Haegs to be exposed anyway, but I think we wind up better off with this setup than the other way. Haeger gave me some confidence that he could perform out of the bullpen as a long-man by doing exactly that in September, and I would like to see him at least be slotted into that role next year. If he fails...well, that's why he's the 6th guy out. And I for one also would vastly prefer an outfield of Figgins/Anderson/Dye to one of Podsednik/Figgins/Dye. Defensively the former is much, much better, it's several million dollars cheaper, and it has a much higher ceiling.

QUOTE(fathom @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 04:57 PM) I'd like to quickly add that if we go with Figgins in CF, Pods in LF, and Fields at 3B, we might as well reserve our 4th place finish in the division. And I'll retort that if we do that with a rotation of Contreras, Buehrle, Garland, Santana, and McCarthy, we might also consider measuring fingers. (oh, it'd be nice to get something for Vaz in the process by the way)

Just in case anyone cares, and because I think it's probably worth adding to this thread, the half life of Polonium-210 is 138 days. It decays via alpha decay to lead 206. A good rule of thumb is that after 5 half-lives of a radioactive isotope, that isotope is approximately dead.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 04:11 PM) Not why I answered it that way, if we get Santana then we should keep both imo. I'd be very unhappy if either were traded. Major agreement from this side as well. If you could put a pair of right arms like E. Santana and B. McCarthy out in your rotation for the next 5 years...it's hard to be in better shape than that. The Twins could have really used some offensive help. Would it make sense for them to deal a Liriano or a J. Santana to get it?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 15, 2006 -> 12:29 PM) And one more that of course never hit the MSM... http://www.investors.com/editorial/editori...247191278714751 ABC News