Tuesday Bird Droppings.
by duck on Apr 20, 2010 6:56 AM EDT
in Open Threads
Email
PrintSigh. Here (Zrebiec), here (MLB.com), here (SeaTimes), and here (Melewski).
Orioles' Pie out three months | MLB.com: News
"Outfielder Felix Pie, who was put on the 15-day disabled list last Friday because of an upper back muscle strain, actually has a ruptured latissimus dorsai, the broadest muscle in the back, and will miss three months." Ouch. -duck
Tejada says he's feeling better | orioles.com: News
"Miguel Tejada said he's feeling good and will probably be back in the Orioles lineup on Tuesday night." You're not fooling anyone, you know. You'll be stone dead in a minute. -duck
Orioles Insider: Bergesen down, Castillo up
I'm sure they will let him fly instead of taking a bus, but Brad Bergesen is going to Norfolk either way. That boy ain't right. Alberto Castillo takes his spot on the 25-man roster. -duck
A few odds and ends - MASNsports.com
Lou Montanez will get most of the LF starts, Brian Roberts hasn't been cleared for any baseball-related activities, and Koji Uehara managed to throw 35 pitches on the side without spontaneously combusting. -duck
The Schmuck Stops Here: Cal's statement in focus
Peter Schmuck gives his take on Cal's statement yesterday. -duck
Cal Ripken Jr. addresses media reports that he has pursued front office job with Orioles - baltimoresun.com
Cal Ripken said, sure, he's interested in being in the front office of the O's, and he and Andy MacPhail have talked, and he's sticking to his timeline of two years when his son graduates high school. Nothing to see here people, move along. -duck
Orioles are cuckoo for not hiring Ripken - MLB News - FOX Sports on MSN
"First off, I stand by the story. Every single word." Well, there's that. -duck
Ryan Minor on Kolodny and Dalles - MASNsports.com
"It's a credit to Tyler. He came into camp in great shape," Delmarva manager Ryan Minor said." I'll just bet it was the BEST SHAPE OF HIS LIFE. -duck
Baseball Has Moments but Still Dozing Into Oblivion -- FanHouse
A very good article article about some of baseball's issues that are leading to a decline in its popularity. As a bonus, various members of the Red Sox and Yankee organizations, and Dustin Pedroia in particular, come across as supreme douchebags in it. I know, you're shocked, right? -zk
Record crowds for spring training - Pittsburgh Pirates - BradentonHerald.com
A record number of fans attended Grapefruit League spring training games this year. Over 100,000 of them came to see the O's at Ed Smith Stadium. -zk
Teams slow out of the gate, quiet at the plate - USATODAY.com
If it makes you feel any better, we're not the only team that's had a rough beginning to the season. -zk
MLB wont let Rays skipper wear hoodie during games - MLB News - FOX Sports on MSN
Joe Maddon can't do his Bill Belichick impersonation anymore. -duck
252 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
All right!! We'll have Pie back just in time for the playoff run!!
Straws. You have to grasp at them. C’mon, you try.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
see ya bergy
hopefully you figure out whatever the hell it is you’re doing wrong.
koji, don’t let godzilla ruin your body again.
So Bergy is down and Castillo up?
Does that mean Hendo to the rotation? or Berken?
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
It would have been nice if Tillman wasn't sucking it up in Norfolk
I would prefer that those two stay in the pen. My gut is they wait on Jake. Which leaves our boy Simon!! Ok I prefer Berken.
yea this blows
i dont want to see hendo or berken starting.
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 7:41 AM EDT up reply actions
What if we were to do a Hendo/Berken start?
Berken does innings 1-3, Hendo gets 4-7, and then we have the bullpen clean it up.
"Roberts is unconscious!!!!" - Jim Hunter, after Brian Roberts hits his second HR of the night. 9/21/09
No one, for now
The off day falls so we can skip his turn, apparently.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
i think they'll be evaluating who is going to the 60 day DL
if they move pie or roberts there, then they can bring up arrieta without worrying about him not being on the 40 man (although, admittedly, i have no idea how that works….i’m just going on what i heard somewhere)
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 7:40 AM EDT up reply actions
This keeps getting uglier every day it seems
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
yup and i doubt it going to stop anytime soon.
Matt Wieters Was Drafted 5th Overall Because The First 4 Teams Thought That Harnessing The Power Of Ten-thousand Suns Was Playing God.
by 17oriolesfan on Apr 20, 2010 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions
This comment really annoys me...
“For the game to resonate in the future, the fuddy-duddies in charge must recognize the importance of making the product faster, younger, sexier and more streamlined.”
I guess I see what they mean…but do you really want to appeal to the kind of people who need everything to be ‘faster and sexier’? I like baseball the way it is, I just plain enjoy it….byt I understand that my opinion is not shared by many.
Reminds me of something Ayn Rand said when an architect remarked that stairs on a library make it too seperate from the common people…too which she remarked ‘Do we want to make a library accessible to people to whom climbing a set of stairs is too great an obstacle to read a book?’ or something like that. I’m paraphrasing…..
"Real Orioles don't pout. Real Orioles don't gloat. Real Orioles just win."
Sorry...
There are all kinds of mistakes in that last post….I was typing annoyed….
"Real Orioles don't pout. Real Orioles don't gloat. Real Orioles just win."
by NewYorkOriole on Apr 20, 2010 8:53 AM EDT up reply actions
faster, younger, sexier and more streamlined
yeah, that was the stupid part of his post.
faster and more streamlined? I agree.
“younger”? “sexier”? fuck you, dude. we don’t need to change the rules.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
Agree with the part about baseball and all
but isn’t the answer to Ayn Rand’s hypothetical question a resounding “yes”???
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
well, it depends
if you’re talking about people with disabilities, yes.
if you’re talking about people too lazy to climb a flight of stairs, no.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
I mean I guess that idea is nice and simple, but then what happens to the people who are too lazy to climb the flight of stairs? This is all hypothetical since there are no people who are too lazy to climb stairs to get to the library that would actually come to the library if it weren’t for the flight of stairs. But the thing I find annoying about Rand is that the arguments like that are then used for broader social situations where barriers actually do prevent people from doing things that are in societies’ interest to have them do and if we go with the simple answer of “well screw ‘em if they’re too lazy to do it” we end up paying for it in different ways anyways.
I think Rand is an idiot in general.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Oh, I can't STAND Ayn Rand
but I don’t believe in dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator either.
I don’t think you’d put a flight of stairs on a library with the intention of discouraging people. But if it was a necessary element in the design, and someone said, “well, that may discourage certain able-bodied-but-not-motivated people”, I’d respond that the lack of a stairway (i.e., an elevator or ramp) is not going to be the thing that makes a difference with those people. They need to learn the utility of a library in other ways.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
That was the main thrust of quoting that....
I don’t want baseball dumbed down to the lowest common denominator. Not all of us need to be constantly stimulated and ‘entertained’.
Leave us alone with our thoughts.
"Real Orioles don't pout. Real Orioles don't gloat. Real Orioles just win."
by NewYorkOriole on Apr 20, 2010 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh and about Ayn Rand....
I love ‘The Fountainhead’ for her views on art. She totally rails against mediocrity and the lowest common denominator in art.
Her political/economic views, eh…..
"Real Orioles don't pout. Real Orioles don't gloat. Real Orioles just win."
by NewYorkOriole on Apr 20, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Ayn Rand was a fascist
and it’s easy to ignore the needs of the disabled. Until you have a child with one.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
I'm no fan of Ayn Rand,
but I’m not sure how she was a fascist. I haven’t actually read any of her books, but from what I’ve read about her, she was basically a hyper-individualist who took Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” idea to a perverse extreme to justify selfishness as simple self-interest. Fascism is totalitarian: big-government, next-to-no individual rights, state-guided economy; Rand wanted a weak government, was all about the individual rights, and favored laissez-faire economics. Right?
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
Tyranny of those in power
That’s what I meant, I chose the wrong word.
And there’s no room for any checks on power in Ayn Rand’s world. Coal miners would still end up owing their employers at the end of the week the way they did in 1876 if she had had her way. No compassion for those with need, no check on industry, no social justice of any kind.
In a Rand-esque world, children like my vision-impaired son would be negelcted and left to beg in the streets rather than be offered the few accomodations he needs to learn. Rugged individualism is great – if you’re a 6’3", 205 lbs white male with no learning, social or physical disabilities. But how many of us fit that profile?
So we want Libertarianism, huh? Like this, right?
Let’s consider, say, the year 1880. Here was a society in which people were free to keep everything they earned, because there was no income tax. They were also free to decide what to do with their own money—spend it, save it, invest it, donate it, or whatever. People were generally free to engage in occupations and professions without a license or permit. There were few federal economic regulations and regulatory agencies. No Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, bailouts, or so-called stimulus plans. No IRS. No Departments of Education, Energy, Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor. No EPA and OSHA. No Federal Reserve. No drug laws. Few systems of public schooling. No immigration controls. No federal minimum-wage laws or price controls. A monetary system based on gold and silver coins rather than paper money. No slavery. No CIA. No FBI. No torture or cruel or unusual punishments. No renditions. No overseas military empire. No military-industrial complex
As a libertarian, as far as I’m concerned, that’s a society that is pretty darned golden..
Sounds great, right? Let’s take it to its logical conclusion.
A golden age in which people kept all that they earned. Of course, what they earned in the absence of those debilitating minimum wage laws could be nothing more than worthless tokens from the company store. What they earned from twelve hours of work seven days a week could be actually be a bigger debt to the company that sent you into a mine or factory and made you pay for the wear on your tools, the water you drank, the fuel for your lamp, even the blasting powder you used.
I’ll pass on a completely “free market”. Because, objectively, there can never be such a thing.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
But there is a balance and tipping to the otherside of that balance
In my opinion, is equal damaging and illogical.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Just our of curiosity
how could it be equally damaging? And more importantly who are the people proposing a system where the equally damaging would actually be possible? Because there are lots of people proposing a system that duck describes above.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
I'm with WW on this one.
I don’t think we need the extent of the social programs and resulting taxation of Europe, but we don’t need 1880 all over again, either.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
but who is proposing that the US adopt those programs and taxation?
And even if they were is the outcome really as damaging?
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
My point is there is a balance
By “damaging” I mean living in a country that is debt-ridden and for a long time will be indebted to China (the growing superpower threatening to overtake us as a global superpower). Is that really a smart business model to continue to spend spend spend, borrow borrow borrow. At what point does it stop? (And Im not putting this on Obama, granted I believe he is A culprit of it, but Bush certainly was as well).
Its gotten completely out of control. And as an accountant for the government, I see the BS firsthand.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure it's not the best business model
but I don’t think it’s as fundamentally dangerous as the Rand proposed society. Also the current debt situation is not a liberal goal – the situation that duck describes above is an actual goal of the Rand strand of the GOP.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
I'm confused.
Aren’t you the self-described gun-toting socialist? But you want fewer social programs and taxation than Europe?
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
* and less taxation
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
I am a gun-totin' socialist
but mostly because I despise corporations and their influence on the laws of this nation and the administration and writing of policy. Socialism is nothing more than the government control of means of production. I don’t mind people working in coal mines, I’d just rather the government own them than people like Don Blankenship.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
I'm not sure I follow.
You want the government to run what are currently major corporations in order to better enforce existing labor laws, etc.? But aside from that, you’re more or less fine with current levels of social programs and taxation and such?
I really don’t want to start a debate (the last time I did that was not fun), so I hope I’m not sounding snide; I’m just curious.
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
I'm tired of corporations playing by a different set of rules
I’m tired of having to pay a $250 ETF if I want to change phone companies, but they don’t owe me a dime when they provide shitty service.
I’m tiredof insurance companies dropping people who are current on premiums at the drop of a hat, but won’t provide coverage when it’s needed because it isn’t profitable to them.
I’m tired of scumbags like Don Blaneknship playing Russian Roulette with the lives of his employees so he can buy another farm.
I’m tired of companies making monopolistic deals with governments and localities and deciding who gets service and who doesn’t, when no other competition is allowed.
I’m tired of companies that simply wipe out the pensions of their workers when they file for a reorganizational bankruptcy, and people who worked decades are left peniless, while the owners get bonuses.
I’m really, really tired of stock market brokerages.
Basically, I have lost faith in the free market system. I think, left to its own devices, we will go back to the abuses of the 1830s, when 10 year olds worked in factories and were fired when they lost an arm in a machine. I simply have no faith in capitalism anymore. None.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Yeah. I hear all that.
I just don’t really see how government owning everything would help much, if at all. It’s still people, and 98% of people (made-up statistic!) turn into total scumbags when they gain significant power, and I think politicians are no better than CEOs. And, like I said below, I’d argue that government letting business get into its bed is half the problem these days.
But, I really do get where you’re coming from.
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
Im not proposing a system of NO-TAX and NO-GOVT AID
Im proposing a system of smaller government, responsible spending, and more power given back to the states. I don’t think anyone will argue that spending has spiraled ridiculously out of control and the pretty obvious result of that will be a greater burden on the taxpayer. I think a system in which 49% of Americans pay NO TAXES is pretty bogus. I mean, sure we can obviously exclude those with disabilities from paying taxes or even those struggling to find jobs, but HALF of AMERICANS not paying taxes to me is insane.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Right
but you said that the opposite is just as dangerous – I wasn’t asking you to explain your beliefs which, while I disagree with, are certainly reasonable. I was just asking how the opposite could be as damaging.
Also the 49% number that you quote don’t pay INCOME taxes. They pay taxes on goods and services like all the rest of us.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Income taxes which is what I thought we were discussing as the result of social programs
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't think we were talking about any of that
but I don’t think income taxes are the only source of funding for social programs.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
This is a funny point
It should be noted that there are so many progressive and regressive taxes that its hillarious. For example, low income tax payers are normally the ones that consume tobacco, so thats a regressive tax. The income tax is obviously a progressive tax.
The system is so complicated that no one understands it and the rationale behind many parts of it is questionable at best. I should note that as an accountant I unfortunately have spent too much time in the tax code.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude, you're better than RNC talking points
Look up how much ExxonMobile paid to the US Government in taxes last year.
I’ll give you a hint – you won’t even need your ingers and toes to count that high. It’s ZERO dollars.
Coporations are much more to fault for the mess we’re in than low-income families recieving more in tax credits than their tax liability.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
And while we're at it..
Two out of every three corporations paid no income taxes from 1998-2005.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
But does it have to be either/or
Im in complete agreement with you on what bullshit that is (corporate fraud and accounting practices). I think at least 80% of Americans should be in some position to bear the financial burden for all the great things we enjoy in this country. Ive lived in 7 states in the past 15 years and rubbed shoulders in alot of communities and I dont see how its possible that 50% of people (49) get off the hook when it comes to bearing the burden.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Again - they're only off the hook on income taxes.
They pay taxes on every single thing they purchase. It’s not like they’re not paying into the system at all.
And I don’t know – living in west Philly and NYC for 6 years it wasn’t difficult at all to see a shitload of people who shouldn’t be paying income taxes. Hell take a stroll 8-10 blocks from OPACY and you’ll see a shitload as well.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
In many cases, they are paying taxing
but qualify for deducations or credits that outweigh their tax liability.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
It’s my understanding that a big part of the problem is that our tax code is so huge and so complicated that abuses and loopholes are everywhere. And it’s an example of one way in which I have a big problem with major corporations: it’s too easy for them to lobby with the government to get exceptions to the rule (laughably, usually under the name of “reform”) which increase their profitability and, in turn, kill small businesses.
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
This is so misleading
People forget that there is double taxation involved with most coporations. So even though these big bad businesses paid no income taxes each of these dollars was taxed as either a capital gain or dividends.
Also, did you know income taxes were not constitutional until the early 1900’s
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
OK, I screwed up the Lincoln reference
He didn’t sign the 16th Amendment, since that was ratified in 1913. But…
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25787.html
On this day in 1861 (Aug. 5), in order to finance the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Revenue Act, imposing the first federal income tax in U.S. history.
Before asking Congress to act, Lincoln sent letters to cabinet members Edward Bates, Gideon Welles and Salmon Chase requesting their views as to whether the president had the constitutional authority to "collect [such] duties." The president also expressed concern about the potential need to replace revenue from ports along the Southeastern seaboard, which he feared might fall under Confederate control.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
And respectfully Duck
Everytime you make a point I dont retort with “MORE DNC TALKING POINTS”. I hear you out and attempt my counterpoint. But thats neither here nor there…
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions
To lump every fiscal conservative in with all things RNC
is oversimplification to the max. Every republican and democrat are not the same. Many lean further left and right than the core, and many have different views socially, morally and economically. So everytime I have something to say, I don’t expect a “MORE TALKING POINTS FROM THE RNC” dis.
Thanks
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
That's a fair point
and one that I will try and remember in our future discussions.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Thanks
Now let me ask you how you feel about the national debt and propose ideas on how to reduce getting into it deeper.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
why didn't conservatives care about the national debt when Bush was president?
And waging two wars he couldn’t pay for while trying to start a third?
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
I already said I did, and I fault him for it.
So again with the “conservatives”…. we aren’t all in the same boat.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
the overwhelming majority of conservatives were silent on the matter.
you would be the exception.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
The spending is and has been rampant and out of control....
We are literally spending money we cant pay back. How is that good for a nation? If we were taxing our residents and speding that money, that is one thing and a separate discussion, but to be spending spending our way into greater greater and greater debt, and while you can remark “sounds like China’s problem”, I believe it is our kid’s problem and theirs. You don’t think at some point the loan officer stops playing?
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm the one
with the smart aleck mentality toward China. :)
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Waging two wars that weren't included in the budget
it was all off the books. at least the current president is upfront about what Iraq and Afghanistan cost us.
But I’ve been saying that for a year – where was all this outrage under Bush????
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Bush was messed up in the head
lowering taxes doesnt justify higher spending, thats just dumb
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I think right now...
the national debt is the least of our worries. We get the conomy going again, with Keynesian economics tells us requires and infusion of government spending, and we head back to the days of the 1990s under Clinton when we run yearly surpluses each year. THEN we can pay down the debt.
But to be honest, I think our national debt is China’s problem, not ours. What are they gonna do – call the loans?
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
I find Keynesian economics funny
In thoery it would work, but government action is always a lagging indicator of what the economy is doing. This means that politicians are always behind the times and their policies aren’t helping.
I also find gov’t spending funny, people complain about big businesses being evil but argue for big governement. The only difference to the two in my mind is you cant sell your stock in a bad government if you dont agree with their actions.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, from teh vantage point of the privileged
At least poor (and middle income) people can vote politicans out.
Most stockholders CANNOT sell their stock in a bad company, because most individual investors are invested in mutual funds. There’s no individual accountability for each company in a portfoliofor those, and you have to sell shares in the entire fund to divest yourself of a single corporation.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
And
unless you’re a billionaire with a massive stock position you have absolutely no say in the direction of the company you own stock in. Unlike in politics where, as you say, you don’t like ’em vote ’em out.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
so you're saying
That I have more say with my measly vote with the government than with a corporation? With investments, if you dont like P&G then buy JNJ, or if you dont like Smith and Wesson then buy Ruger. You have the ability to chose for yourself and are not at the mercy of the majority and the corrupt politicians that inevitably take over.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Eh I think a measly vote is a pretty powerful – we’d be in much better shape as a country if we had a few more measly votes in 2000.
You’re right you can buy what you want though.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
I think that both parties are terrible, there is no conservative party. But i’m limited primarily to democrats and republicans. So in that manner, i’m horribly limited in my options because voting for an independent is like throwing my vote away.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Then find a better mutual fund
Or manage your own investments (i do), having a majority shouldnt allow you to steal from the minority.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Side note
Mutual funds suck anyways. You would be amazed at how much their fees cut into your actual return. Not only that but I think its like 94% of them dont beat the S&P 500 so you may as well have been in an index fund matching the market with minimal fees.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
I’m definitely not that concerned about the debt. I think it’s blown substantially out of proportion. How we’ll pay for social security down the road is quite another matter though…
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
the easiest solution
Is to increase the age for when you can collect. When it was instituted the average person would only collect a half a year of benefits before dying or something like that. Cut down on the program and you find your solution. I dont know why people think that the gov’t should provide for you to sit around when you get old.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, says the eprson in a position of privilege younger than 40
I’ve paid into the Social Security system since Los Angeles had teh Olympics. Will I collect more than I paid? Sure – it’s called inflation.
But, the rules of the game were, I paid 7.75% of my income into this fund, and it was going to pay me when I retired. Don’t go changing the rules now wihout keeping me into a system I’ve invested 25+ years of my life (and teaxes) in.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
This is the hard part, dealing with people that have paid money into a broken system all of their lives and explaining to them that its broken. I dont think you can cut it out but its going to have to be phased back since its broken and all.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with you on the rule-changing
But its not like you or I have ever had a choice. We are at the government’s mercy on what happens with our money. Social Security is going to be a bloody trainwreck in the future, and if the government messed that up so miserably, who’s to say a similar fate isn’t going to happen with other massive programs we are turning over to them?
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t see how administering a program like Social Security is at all comparable to regulating the healthcare and financial sectors. They just don’t seem very related.
I assume those are what you’re referring to with your “other massive programs we’re turning over to them” comment?
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Honestly
I dont think I can name one government program that is run well/efficiently. Thats enough reason for me to say we shouldnt be asking for more government
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok
My personal belief is that the government should exist only to protect the three basic rights of its citizens that virtually everyone can agree on: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Military obviously fits in protecting the life of its people. Social security violates it because it takes from the liberty of one person to provide benefits to another. So I believe it should not be the governments responsibility.
So I should have clarified when i said government program, beyond the essential ones necessary for protecting the life/liberty/ and pursuit of happiness for citizens.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
You're gonna have to help me with this one.
Social security violates it because it takes from the liberty of one person to provide benefits to another.
Don’t all programs funded by tax dollars do that? The military does. The forcibly take tax dollars from me to fund the military.
So now, we’re just arguing whether the program is worth the cost. And that’s a different argument than denying anyone liberty.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
All government programs do run on taxes and therefore fundamentally take away from a persons liberty. However programs like the FDA and military are necessary to protect the freedoms of everybody, and arguably are a service that everyone needs, and not just a subset of the population
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't think teh FDA is protecting anyone's freedoms
Our food and drug supply? Sure. Our freedom? Nope. So again, we’re arguing about cost effectiveness, not denying liberty.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
I think we would be fine without the FDA
If allowed and demanded the private sector would end up with a comperable if not superior solution. I’m not going to complain about the FDA because in theory its about protecting the “life” of its citizens to make sure poor food isn’t administered. I still think the private sector could do a better job of it.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
how long would that take
and how many kids would die from eating tainted baby food before that happened? and why would a private sector option be any better? Because tax dollars don’t go to pay for it? What exactly would pay for it? Donations? Profits from the companies that the group was intended to regulate?
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
You trust the PRIVATE SECTOR
with manufacturing drugs with no governmental check.?
Remember Thalidomide? DDT?
Corporations would be killing peoples by the thousands and getting away with it..
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Why does the government need to run everything
There would be non-governmental regulatory bodies funded by the airline industry that would codify standards for air traffic controllers, and non-profit groups that would keep them honest.
Extrapolate from current examples:
Underwriters Laboratories
Consumer Reports
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
Really?
Then why isn’t the financial sector regulating itself? why wasn’t the health insurance industry regulating itself? The mortgage industry?
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Gov't had a hand in the banking crisis
Encouraging practices that led to the crisis etc. How would gov’t oversight have helped in that situation when the oversight was part of the problem?
De-regulating derivatives was more of a cuase
And here’s why some of what you think you know about the sub-prime mess may not be true
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
I'm totally a non-expert in this sort of thing
I trust my man Ron Paul. He believes in creationism but knows his shit when it comes to economics.
Ron Paul is the man
Its funny, people on the far right and far left support him, and no one can deny that he knows his shit.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Loved the way
he completely smacked down Ghouliani during the primaries
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
Anybody who slaps that jackass around is ok in my book
But RP has some pretty crazy ideas in my opinion – dropping out of the UN, building a border fence, abolishing income taxes, etc. I could definitely get on board with his policy on drugs though.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
haha
I don’t even smoke (maybe once a year – it’s been over a year since the last time) – I just think the amount of money we spend policing, prosecuting, and incarcerating people for doing things that only hurt themselves is foolish.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Yes
They’re called victimless crimes, and the drug war sets a scary precedent that the government can tell you what you can and cannot do to your own body. Now, even though this thread strand is a little narrow to tackle abortion, the difference between the war on drugs and abortion is that abortion kills a fetus, which in my opinion is no longer part of your body and is a separate individual, even if it cannot survive on its own (since you can say the same for infants and young children).
Oh, absoluteley
Who knows? May be if enough people see ending the drug war in practical, pragmatic terms as far as its effect on the budget we could get somewhere.
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
Agreed
He smacked down a number of people. Remember all that talk in the republican debate about “advanced interrogation techniques”? Ron called that nonsense “Newspeak”. He’s the man. Here’s me and him:
That's pretty cool
Some of his positions seem weird to me – he wants the government totally out of healthcare except to say that abortion is illegal.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
True, he wants to overturn Roe
But wouldn’t object to each state setting its own policy, no matter what he thinks personally.
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
Oh most definitely
does that mean that they shouldn’t try to solve it?
I don’t think there’s much of an argument that TOO MUCH government oversight led to the problem. Disastrous government policies (like the encouragement of home ownership for all and the GOP Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) sure contributed to it, but I don’t think lack of government oversight was even remotely close to the problem.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Yeah true
I don’t know why I entered the argument, I mostly agree with what you’re saying. I just hate the argument that air traffic controllers etc can only exist if run by the government.
I mean
I don’t think they can ONLY exist when the government runs them, but I think that if left to the groups of people who’s sole interest is profits regulation is going to be dramatically slower, weaker, and biased towards industry.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
All of whom have NO regulatory powers
If you can’t enforce a punishment, you are powerless.
Companies didn’t stop making DDT because they were asked nicely.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Wow. Just, wow.
Hmm, not much space, I’ll just send you HERE
And here.
And here.
And here.
And here. Mail a letter by FedEx and see how much it costs you.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
FedEx – I believe my taxes are subsidizing it anyways so while I may not “pay” much for it, its an artificial cheap.
Ok it may be a generalization to say all gov’t programs are poorly run, but in the private sector the poorly run organizations naturally fail and end. In the public sector they continue on and drain unless somebody decides to end it.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
That's the problem - they don't.
but in the private sector the poorly run organizations naturally fail and end.
Goldman Sachs? Still standing.
CitiBank? Still standing
Comcast? Still standing
AOL? Still standing
HP? Still standing.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Many of those are standing because of "too big to fail"
Aka the government and i think they should have been allowed to fail. While it temporarily may have been more of a shock, in the long run you would have “clensed” the system.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Aren't most of those companies
either subsidized, owned, or in possession of monopolistic contracts with the government?
By the way, I hate to break this to you
Social Security is a legal ponzi scheme that you’ve been forced to pay money into all your life
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
That being said, i would be pissed if i had to pay into it for 25+ years and not reap any of the benefits.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Is it?
The basic idea of a ponzi scheme is you continue to bring in new investors in order to pay off the old ones while skimming some off the top. While its hard to say if they are skimming off the top, the rest of it matches social security exactly. Bring in new funds from new investors in order to pay off the old ones, and the cycle continues until you’ve amassed a far greater obligation then you can handle. To me that sounds like social security.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 21, 2010 8:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Massive oversimplification
a) a ponzi scheme also makes SOMEBODY at the top or first in rich – nobody is getting even close to rich off their social security checks.
b) nobody is “skimming some off the top” – they’re being paid out exactly as planned. There’s nothing even remotely shady going on.
c) there has to be some acknowledgment of intent here. Social security was just fine until life expectancy advanced 20 years.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
well
Yes nobodys getting rich, but when it was initially created it did appease the older crowd and C) is the biggest flaw in social security today. If they returned it to its intended purpose I wouldn’t complain about it even though i dont believe the government should be involved with something like that.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 21, 2010 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
That first part wasn't clear
It appeased the older crowd and they were the initial benefitors of it. The people who never paid in but received benefits, but you cant go back and change that now so how do you rectify it is the question.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 21, 2010 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s still paying the “older crowd” just fine. It just probably won’t be paying me. That doesn’t make it a ponzi scheme though.
Just out of curiosity, do you think we should go back to how the private sector handled retirement before the government got involved and just have our elderly living in poverty with their children except for the wealthy? Who exactly would pick up the slack if government didn’t do it? That’s the part I don’t get.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Also why do we even consider Keynesian economics at all
“In the long run we are all dead”
So we shouldnt plan for the future. Thats just dumb as hell, i’m sorry. Keynesian economics are laughable and I think they are largly to blame for the cycles that the economy goes through because it controls things at artificial levels.
I would like to hear a counter point on it because from the moment I was taught Keynesian economics I thought it was a system that violates common sense.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions
well isn’t 1929 a pretty good example of what happens when business cycles are left to their own devices without keynesian approaches?
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
"I know! We'll all borrow money to invest!"
“The stock market always goes up!”
How little we learned in 70 years…
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Isn't that in essence what are country is doing?
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
My whole point
We need MORE government regulation of corporations, not less.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Effective regulation
with the power to punish would be a great start. I know I won’t get Socialism in my lifetime, and I’m OK with that.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
who exactly is advocating for control?
people keep using words like “control” and “takeover” when describing regulation. It’s very misleading.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
1929 is a good example of the Federal Reserve System being broken
A public system that is quite possibly the most broken of them all.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions
THis I gotta hear
Explain to me how the Fed caused the Great Depression and not unregulation borrowing for speculative investment. This I gotta hear.
Will read later – gotta go to SB with the girl.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Yea I have to roll soon, but i'll get it to you
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Its briefly mentioned in that article
http://www.lightparty.com/Economic/EconomicEvil.html
In short it was because of all the excess printing and interest rates were far too low from 1913-1929. This encouraged bad loans to be made, and the bubble was created. Since you could obtain credit so cheaply and easily even bad investments because hugly overvalued. Once the fed lowered rates again people defaulted on their credit driving prices lower and more people into default.
Even more briefly put, artificial credit provided by the fed produced a buble that eventually collapsed.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I just had one of the prof's at my school
So i knew he was reputable and he wrote the article. I dont know about the rest of the site, i probably should have taken the time to make sure it wasn’t too crazy but oh well.
The funny part about the Fed system is that more than any other system it benefits the rich and supresses the poor. Inflation affects everybody the same (like a flat tax) but since the poor and middle class have a higher percentage of their assets tied up in currency, they lose a greater percentage of their wealth. In addition the Fed messing around with the money supply and interest rates increases the booms/busts of the economy. This helps the rich because they know that you want to buy low and sell high, and they dont panic when the market hits its lows. Therefore while the poor and middle class take their money out when the market is bottoming out (and lose out on huge gains like the ones had in the past year) and then buy at a higher price. In addition, the rich have more resources to withstand the bigger busts.
The funniest part is that most of the poor and middle class have no idea any of that is happening. Kinda sad actually. The other funny part is that when the Fed causes inflation, people then pay capital gains taxes when they sell their assets for more than they paid.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m confused – the fed spends a good amount of it’s time and energy avoiding/controlling inflation. If inflation primarily impacts the poor, then isn’t the fed looking out for the poor?
And I don’t know about the adjustment of interest rates worsening the boom/bust economy – the whole point of it is to control the booms and busts and many argue the reason we haven’t had a prolonged depression since 1929 is specifically because of that interest rate control.
Buy low and sell high is a simple thing that very few people get right rich or poor, but poor people don’t own stocks so they are not really impacted at all. Do you have any data showing that rich people stayed in the market longer than middle class people? I’ve never heard that argument before and actually thought it would be the opposite – that the more people had to lose the more antsy they’d be when the market starts going south. Certainly the rich have more resources to withstand the busts.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
The fed is the #1 reason for inflation, they just print extra money and flood it into the economy which equals inflation.
In theory the whole point is to control the boom/busts but unless you can see into the future you cant make the policies to actually do that. I obviously am not going to agree that the Federal reserve has kept us from prolonged depressions, because I think that depression was prolonged by the high taxes/gov’t programs put in place by Hoover and FDR. Since we haven’t had a Hoover or FDR or 90% income taxes since then we haven’t encountered a prolonged depression.
I dont have proof that the middle class were more likely to bail at the bottom(we’ll say that instaed of poor since the poor dont invest which is one reason they remain in the lowest class), but another site I follow is the motley fool (www.fool.com) and i remember them saying on there that individual investors just a month or two ago started getting back into the market. I would just assume that rich people typically have better control of their financial emotions or have a financial planner that does. I’ve never seen proof either way, but i dont think the amount of money makes a difference because either way losing money triggers an emotion in the brain similar to pain which causes people to become afraid of losing more so even if you have $10,000 invested or $10 M you would feel the same emotions but chances are the $10M guy is better educated and in better control of his emotions. I dont have proof either way on that one though.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 21, 2010 9:03 AM EDT up reply actions
The fed is the #1 reason for inflation, they just print extra money and flood it into the economy which equals inflation.
Which is why we’ve had such AWFUL inflation for the last 30 years???
And really? really? The reason we haven’t had a depression since 1929 is because we haven’t had a Hoover or FDR? Please. That’s absolutely laughable.
No idea what you’re talking about with this
individual investors just a month or two ago started getting back into the market.
You think individual investors don’t include rich people? does that term have a class connotation that I’m not aware of? It’s almost entirely used to distinguish from institutional investors (mutual funds, pension funds, etc) and typically those bodies are primarily made up of middle class investors. I’m pretty sure that study after study has shown that financial planners do no better than the typical investor tracking the S&P, so I think that’s a bad assumption that rich people with their investing advisers would do any better at timing the market than anybody else. Lots of studies have shown that more arrogant people (rich people are probably overrepresented there) tend to do worse in the market since they THINK that they can effectively time it.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
Legalize drugs, gambling, and prostitution. Job creation, tax revenue, and cost savings all rolled into one. Plus a little more fun for everybody!
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
by O'sFan21 on Apr 20, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think most people would agree with most of this
Man, I go run errands for two hours and I miss the one day we’re really going into the nuts and bolts of politics? That’s cruel to do to your resident public policy major – I’ve missed all the fun!
A question worth asking is, to what extent is there wasteful and other completely unnecessary spending that could be cut out without tangible harm to people? As well, how much does a lack of transparency in certain spending situations lead to corruption and a price being paid for work that could be obtained at the same quality for cheaper?
There is probably more of the latter at local and state levels – reference any number of contractor-donors getting plum projects for something that may not even need to be done anyway. The first example that comes to mind for you probably has to do with a highway project. The former is more of a federal problem, I think. There you’re probably looking at stuff like Medicare fraud that goes unenforced, and programs that were good 20 or 30 years ago and are somehow still lingering even though they aren’t really necessary any more, but they can’t be eliminated because it’s a pet program in the district/state of some key Representative or Senator.
All of the above are areas that can be addressed in the usual give-and-take and compromise, when parties are interested in compromise. “Hey, we need to reduce your favorite program’s spending by $4 million,” and the reply is, “Alright, as long as Y congressman’s favorite gets a spending cut too”, and then there’s dickering and it can get done. When money is involved, there’s always a possibility for compromise.
This becomes difficult in the present climate because both parties are looking to milk social wedge issues for support. Abortion is an old stand-by for this, and gay marriage is increasingly becoming one of these. These are battles that are constantly being waged and they are zero-sum: ground gained by one side is ground lost by the other. Health care reform played out like this since the GOP made the calculated choice to try to deny the Obama administration any kind of victory whatsoever; absent this, I think there could have been some incremental middle ground found.
What can schmucks like us do about it? Well… probably nothing. Stay informed, stay involved, and the political climate will change. Then we’ll have some more to argue about.
I'm ready for a straight jacket. - Joe Angel, 4/17/10 (O's record: 1-11)
by Eat More Esskay on Apr 20, 2010 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Like I said, I'm no fan of Rand.
I just think the word “fascist” gets thrown around way too easily and, often, quite incorrectly, that’s all. I have a pretty strong libertarian streak, but I’d definitely call Rand way too extreme. And I hear you on the disability front; my sister has Down’s syndrome.
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
And for the record....
most of the first quote I have from a writer from Reason magazine is actually factually incorrect.
By 1880, America was well on its way to acquiring multiple colonies in the Carribean and Pacific, we just didn’t call them that. Hawaii and the Philippines, acquired just after 1880, didn’t eactly willingly join the US.
There were systems of public education in just about every state – if you were white. Minority? In most states, it was illegal or highly impractical to get a public education.
No IRS? Sure, but Abraham Lincoln had already signed off on a Constitutional Amendment allowing for income tax.
No bailouts? Someone’s forgetting this country’s long history of corporate give-aways. Land grants to railroads, who sold the excess land for profits, Teapot Dome, the list goes on.
The goold ol’ days aren’t what they used to be.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Chomp, zzzzzip
OK, I’ll bite.
As someone who’s READ Rand here’s my take.
Taken in its simplest form Atlas Shrugged is an adventure/mystery. The main characters spend most of the book trying to find out who is John Galt & who is pulling the strings behind society’s breakdown (hint: the questions are related). Sort of like Nite Owl, Roarschack & Silk Spectre trying to find out what’s going on.
There are glaring stylistic flaws. Usually not a good idea to bring the narrative to a screeching halt for a 60 page speech. And her romantic scenes (or rape scenes, depending on your point of view) are beyond atrocious.
That being said, her targets are NOT the poor, disabled, down on their luck, etc. Quite frankly they’re beneath her notice. Her real targets are corporatists and the politicians they call into their offices, slap across the face & tell them, “now get out on that street and EARN for me!” (my words). In today’s world, the Blankenships & McConnells.
Personally I think the kind of society she was advocating would have worked best in an area the size of an ancient Greek city state or a colonial New England villiage. I guess Singapore comes closest, and they have their problems as well. Not exactly a worker’s paradise, but astonishingly effiecient and free of corruption.
And as for me, I’m light years closer to the Ds than to the Rs. But, economic matters aside, the Libertarians will always be a viable option for me until the Ds to more to dismantle the empire & competely abolish this country’s feral and predatory foreign policy. A LOT more.
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
by sluggo 2.0 on Apr 20, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agree w/ Ayn Rand
Well said. I tend to be an ultra traditionalist. If it were up to me, I would not have an electronic scoreboard w/ replay or loud music blaring over the sound system.
right there with you
i HATE the orgam music at yankee stadium, and a lot of the fill-in music in general. I hate the dot races. it’s like, “if we don’t give people something shiny EVERY THREE MINUTES, then they might all leave.”
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
If we were in a courthouse
Your Honer this man Dave Trembley is a absolute failure he has only 2 wins this year with a team with a lot of talent. And the man over there is said to have denied the Iron Man a job. And the those two over there Mr Roberts and Pie are both hurt. And of course dont forget Mr i got hurt filming a commercial Bergesen who should have been sent down a couple of games before. This team is a dissapointment i had high hopes (4th place) for this team and so far they havent not only been dashed but stomped on. Broken and shatered they sit there on the ground. I want a refund for all the hell this season has brought so far. First i want PA to sell the team to someone who cares. 2 I want Trembley gone. 3 I WANT SOME FUCKING WINS! 4 I want Gonzo to give back his waste of a contract and go find somewhere else to blow saves. 5 I want the price of beer at the park to go down. 6 I want Lugo traded to someone who again gives a shit if he knows how to win. 7 I want Matsuz to win ROY and AL CY cause he is BEAST. And last but not least i want a tax refund.
Matt Wieters Was Drafted 5th Overall Because The First 4 Teams Thought That Harnessing The Power Of Ten-thousand Suns Was Playing God.
5 I want the price of beer at the park to go down.
That, by far, is the most important one
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
yup
Matt Wieters Was Drafted 5th Overall Because The First 4 Teams Thought That Harnessing The Power Of Ten-thousand Suns Was Playing God.
by 17oriolesfan on Apr 20, 2010 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions
so true
we need a way to deal with the pain of attending the game for a reasonable price
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Apr 20, 2010 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions
This weekend I paid $10 for a beer at Yankee Stadium
I mean, what?
And by beer, I mean Coors Light.
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
Went to a game with an uncle he paid $15 and then said it was the worst beer he ever had.
Matt Wieters Was Drafted 5th Overall Because The First 4 Teams Thought That Harnessing The Power Of Ten-thousand Suns Was Playing God.
by 17oriolesfan on Apr 20, 2010 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Ha!
Wasn’t it legendary!?
I have not, nor will I, ever buy a beer there. I refuse to spend $10 on a Coors light. You can get a ticket to an O’s game for less money than you can get a beer at a Yankees game. Fuck them.
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
It was the most storied Coors Light in the history of beer
I didn’t even look at the price before I ordered it or I probably would have said no thank you.
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
Btw, nice waiver pickup on Vargas
Traitor.
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
I play to win
I’m so mad, I would be 2-0 if I hadn’t forgotten to take BJ Upton off the bench after their off day.
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
Meh... about the same as paying $7 each for 10 of em at Camden.
Its all absurd.. but do I really want to watch the Os sober? Cant put a pricetag on that…
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
No price is low enough...
for me to buy a Coors Light.
"If you know how to cheat, start now." - Earl Weaver
I have a strong feeling that if you told Pete (and/or Grover) Coors that $10 for a Coors Light was a ripoff
he/they would agree…
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
What happened to that dude on the commercial
that goes into trendy stores and removes their beer because it’s for the average guy? I’d like to see them cart off all the beer, souveniers, seats, and players from Yankee stadium.
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
I think that's High Life
Which is weird because their slogan, “The Champagne of Beers”, doesn’t really follow the idea of marketing to the average guy.
I could be wrong though, and I’m too lazy to research.
No, I think you're right
Maybe that Coors train can just crash into the stadium then. I’d settle for that.
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
Is the "champagne of beers" tag one they still use?
I thought the “common man” stuff must be a sign of re-branding.
I'm ready for a straight jacket. - Joe Angel, 4/17/10 (O's record: 1-11)
by Eat More Esskay on Apr 20, 2010 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Interesting marketing strategies
PBR courting hipsters, while High Life is alienating them. Wonder which is more successful overall?
Or maybe I should say
PBR not messing with a good thing and trying to prolong their ironic popularity as long as possible. i guess they didn’t actually court anyone.
In grad school I got paid $10 once for 30 min in a focus group-- with 9 other males 18-25 -- on beer labeling
Wanna hear the result? After looking at and discussing a half-dozen prototypes, we agreed that the closer the projected Burgermeister can/label came to resembling the current Coors label, the more beer the former was likely to sell.
Of course, the reverse was probably also true: the less the Burgy can resembled anything to do with Burgy— which was the NorCal generic cheapo, suitable only for drinking along with a pizza whose toppings could be described as “strong”, or perhaps “violent”— the more likely a store was going to sell it.
Funny how the brainpan works, ain’t it? And that $10 bought a lot of Oly…
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
Here's what they were starting from
http://breweriana.com/beer-can/details/6680/17/self-opening/burgie-burgemeister-051-28.html
And the Coors-ification of the label obviously didn’t work (if they actually took our advice), ‘cause Burgy tanked, so to speak, soon thereafter (’74). No loss. It’s probably been ignored ever since in beer heaven, too.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
This weekend I paid $10 for a beer bucket of piss at Yankee Stadium
FTFY.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
I still believe that Crowley has to go 1st
Game management isn’t as much an issue as our hitters not hitting the ball at all. Why does every single hitter we have feel it’s a necessity to swing at the 1st pitch?
agreed
i think the first step is getting rid of crowley…he really has no credentials to be hitting coach.
hes a career .250 hitter. with 42 homeruns and 229 rbiis in 14 seasons…ill take someone who actually could play the game to be our coach please?
by Parkinglotninja on Apr 20, 2010 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you, Rob Dibble...
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Ugh...
On some level I still want to believe that Andy MacPhail knows what he is doing, and this 2-11 start and all the injuries are just growing pains. But Andy himself said this is the year we should start judging the team by results. So far the results are hideous, at best.
"If you know how to cheat, start now." - Earl Weaver
Ahhhh
silver lining.
This series is taking years off of my life.
by Knubles and Bits on Apr 20, 2010 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe Andy is preparing the escape pod.
I wonder if
He stopped communicating with the underlings.
Is out of the office quite often.
When he is in the office, he keeps the door shut and spends most of his time on the phone.
Is out of touch with the daily on goings.
If this is happening then someone ought to leak it to Rosenthal. It would be more interesting than that Cal story. At least then we’d know what the guy in charge (right? maybe?) is thinking.
Ugh is right
Injuries, players underperforming (Jones, Markakis in particular. Miggi, Luke, etc.). Wieters scuffling (I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt for a little longer). The bullpen sucks. Now 3E1N can’t put it together. The only thing the O’s have going is Millwood, Guthrie, Matusz.
I need a break. No O’s last night, I’ll repeat again for a while.
I wonder if MacPhail is taking this in stride or is dejected and sees little hope. He’s been pretty quiet.
Millwood, Guthrie, Matusz
& Wiggles. At least with the bat.
by fishoutawata on Apr 20, 2010 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Wieters
is at least hitting the ball hard on a regular basis – he’s got a lot of lineouts this year, but zero to show in the way of power so far.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
except for that home run that he hit.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
Eh
It was the first game of the season and not a particularly good swing.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
yes, but it's higher than zero.
don’t even think of turning this into something.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
True
I just wish he was driving the ball more – it seems like he’s mostly slapping at it and putting top spin on it. All these sinking line drives. Hard to get any carry on the ball like that. I think his swing looked more powerful last year. Markakis is doing the same thing although he’s driving the ball to the opposite field and center a little.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
agreed.
it would be nice i we had a real hitting coach, wouldn’t it?
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
Ugh and little help
I just saw where both Snyder and Bell are hitting under .200 in Norfolk. I was hoping for some hope in Norfolk. Ugh!!!!
John S West Jr
by Adam double bubble on Apr 20, 2010 11:45 AM EDT reply actions
Too early.
I don’t think any of our position prospects in Norfolk (as opposed to AAAA-types) should e called up this early in the season, except for emergencies. And, this eing the Orioles, a 2-12 start is NOT that kind of emergency.
by fishoutawata on Apr 20, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Note the effects of a dodgy “B”-key on a 4-yr old laptop. The “N” ain’t that good either.
by fishoutawata on Apr 20, 2010 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
no iggie.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
Don't know if this is good news (as in maybe we won't see him again this year) or bad news, but...
Marlboro man is going to see James Andrews
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
Damn, that's not good news
I was hoping to get SOMETHING for that $12 large we spent.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Did you guys see this?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/20/obit.keli.mcgregor/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
"Real Orioles don't pout. Real Orioles don't gloat. Real Orioles just win."
catchin up on 24 now, duck
shoulda known all of this was going to happen. so predictable, yet i didnt predict it.
Its gotten insanely good.
Like I told Duck, they are really going out with a BANG, as is LOST.
Captivating. Im going to have an awful time finding replacements for those two shows Ive been in love with for years.
Any suggestions?
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
NCIS
the real one. not the damned los angeles one. outstanding show. gibbs is my tv hero.
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I am loving 24 and LOST right now.
Although, as far as last night, I think Pres. Taylor has the right idea, not Jack.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
Yeah
I was shocked by her decision. Sure, there is a greater good. But she was the one who always did the right thing no matter the greater good (i.e. when the discussion of turning Hassan over), and she stood up and convicted her daughter in jail last season (no real spoiler alert there).
In any case, Jack is going off the deep end, but I cant help but love it/him.
LOST tonight… Im counting down the hours. Im suprised at their efficiency in rectifying all the mysteries of the show this season.
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I love how they've just dropped answers in..
like “Oh yeah, here’s that Whispers thing explained in less than 2 minutes” bit from last week.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
disagree
she thinks peace is the right thing, but its clearly going to be conditional considering that the russians are just trying to avoid being exposed. jack’s gone a little crazy with renee (totally won 20 bucks for calling that btw), but he’s on the right track. deceitful people cant be trusted.
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions
How far up the food chain does the Russian thing go?
Was Suvarov in on the deal to scuttle the peace plan?
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
we havent found out yet
but the prez knows that they arent “unfounded accusations.”
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions
OK, thanks
Thought I might have missed something. Guess we’ll know in 6 weeks.
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
yea that will be the absolute last thing they do
maybe only 5 weeks to wait :-)
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Jack is kind of an ass when it comes to these things
when its personal for him, he’s always as narrow-minded as possible when it comes to getting revenge. When it’s someone else who has been stirred up so zealously, he’s all like “You need to think this through!”. Double-standard, but I sometimes wonder if that’s on the character or the writers?
Outs in baseball are like lives in Mario.
well yea....i mean, stealing a chopper was both dumb and predictable
but hes on to something there. the prez knows the stuff with the russians isnt “unfounded” like she told jack. bauer’s in it for the wrong reason obviously, but he’s got the right idea. you dont make deals with people you cant trust.
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm okay with it
because the show is at it’s absolute best when it’s Jack v. Entire World. They should have just made an entire season out of him hunting down Palmer’s assassins with absolutely no CTU storyline/characters/backup whatsoever. The last chapter of Season 2 with the random gunfire and crazy twists and last minute ideas and so on was one of my 6 or so hours of the show…and then they just never really tried it again. So I’m hoping the last 4(?) hours can really ramp it up.
Outs in baseball are like lives in Mario.
agreed
but seriously….a chopper? it should be a good last 6 hours tho.
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Mods, what's the policy on excerpting from paid subscription articles?
There’s an ESPN Insider-only article on Brian Matusz today, with some interesting points, but I don’t know how much I’m allowed to quote.
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
Can't use much
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
by duck on Apr 20, 2010 4:20 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, I figured.
Guess I’ll just paraphrase and give the gist of it
He says that part of why he thinks Matusz is doing so well is because he’s using his fastball to set up his breaking pitches more often, rather than vice-versa (which, as we know, he’d often done in the past, including last year). He also likes the restrained use of the curve if the change is working, making the former especially effective when he does go to it.
Interesting insight; I’d noticed the second point myself, but not really the first point.
Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs.
Volquez suspended 50 games for PEDs.
Wonder if it was fertility drugs…
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
just saw that
I guess he put down his gat long enough to pick up a syringe.
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
yeah, he will miss exactly zero extra games because of this
Outs in baseball are like lives in Mario.
which i think is retarded and pointless
they should have waited until he got back to suspend him.
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions
oh yeah, it'll rile up some blood and the rules will change
Volquez sure got lucky though
Outs in baseball are like lives in Mario.
All-star voting has started
not that any of these guys deserve to be on it.
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
ive just realized how good flavored seltzer water is
got em like 3 for a dolla today and man are they delicious.
The O's just signed Corey Patterson
http://masnsports.com/school_of_roch/2010/04/orioles-reunite-with-patterson.html
First!
This is the bestest picture of all the internets! http://bit.ly/aHdCBQ
False.
http://www.camdenchat.com/2010/4/20/1432352/orioles-option-brad-bergesen-to#35278977
"You accept mediocrity and you get mediocrity." - Adam Jones, Son!
It looks like andrew beat me by 13 minutes, but
I smell a conspiracy.
This is the bestest picture of all the internets! http://bit.ly/aHdCBQ
Dear Flying Spaghetti Monster...
….what happened to the no politics rule? Or did I imagine that?
To be understood is to be a prostitute. ~ Fernando Pessoa
My guess would be, based on my knowledge of how at least one of the mods thinks
is that the restriction is more for gameday threads.
Open threads/bird droppings are more of a free for all.
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
I didn't think it was as much a "rule"...
…as it was a general guideline since, y’know, the unpleasantness and pointlessness of the exercise.
To be understood is to be a prostitute. ~ Fernando Pessoa
it's technically a rule
Since those discussions have a tendency to get heated and mean, but historically everyone here has been very civil during those discussions so we let it go. If that started changing we might have to crack down a bit. Not to mention duck and zk are always in the middle of it, lol.
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
Heh
Well, OK then.
P.S. Go anarcho-capitalism!
P.P.S. Don’t ban me, m’mkay?
To be understood is to be a prostitute. ~ Fernando Pessoa
If I haven't banned the other stooges in this thread
I think you’re safe :)
This just in: adorableness on the rise, family copes with child getting schooled. Film at 11. -daveh873
Also
I recall Stacey saying she didn’t mind as long as we respect each other’s positions and don’t make it personal blah blah blah….. (kidding Stacey)
by Wieters Wieners on Apr 20, 2010 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions
BANNED
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
here's how we know how fucked we are
open tryouts. hahaha it’s almost comical really. i’m not sure if other teams do this but the thought of an open tryout just makes me laugh.
"nicely done."
"this is mike gonzalez. harden the fuck up mike gonzalez."
http://draftdayencyclopedia.wordpress.com/
we're back in business
Happens every year
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
age limit of 23???
Horseshit!! How am I supposed to live out my Rookie fantasies???
Rub some $100 bills on it, you sell-out. -duck
damn
don’t i feel smart
"nicely done."
"this is mike gonzalez. harden the fuck up mike gonzalez."
http://draftdayencyclopedia.wordpress.com/
we're back in business
haha did you just change that sig to the harden the fuck up?
by twistedlogic on Apr 20, 2010 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah a couple of days ago
i thought i’d strike while the joke was hot
"nicely done."
"this is mike gonzalez. harden the fuck up mike gonzalez."
http://draftdayencyclopedia.wordpress.com/
we're back in business
by danielreese05 on Apr 20, 2010 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions
In keeping with the spirit of the thread
This is Barack, he’s trying to push banking reform through the Senate. Harden the fuck up, Barack!
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Official Sponsor of Camden Chat GameThreads
