Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[josh]

College athletes "Juneteenth" has arrived:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/21/1000310043/the-supreme-court-sides-with-ncaa-athletes-in-a-narrow-ruling

Seeing this shake out is going to be fascinating!

[bankshot1]

College athletes "Juneteenth" has arrived:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/21/1000310043/the-supreme-court-sides-with-ncaa-athletes-in-a-narrow-ruling

Seeing this shake out is going to be fascinating!

it seems pretty clear the "Other Nike"  will eventually step on the NCAA's ability to control pricing and paying student-athletes.

its tough to rationalize anti-trust powers screwing college athletes.

But somehow the SEC and B1G will prosper as the rich usually find a way to get richer.

[Hairy Lime]

College athletes "Juneteenth" has arrived:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/21/1000310043/the-supreme-court-sides-with-ncaa-athletes-in-a-narrow-ruling

Seeing this shake out is going to be fascinating!

it seems pretty clear the "Other Nike"  will eventually step on the NCAA's ability to control pricing and paying student-athletes.

its tough to rationalize anti-trust powers screwing college athletes.

But somehow the SEC and B1G will prosper as the rich usually find a way to get richer.

It may be on a team basis above a league basis. The Big Flexible and Undetermined Amount and God's Conference may do better generally, but a prize 5 star prospect interested in monetizing his status ain't choosing Indiana or Purdue over Ohio State. Or Arkansas over Alabama or LSU.

[REDSTATEWARD]

It was just over a week ago Bill Maher blasted liberals for ignoring the obvious



If you think America is more racist now than ever, more sexist than before women could vote and more homophobic than when blowjobs were a felony, you have ‘progressophobia’ and should adjust your mask because it’s covering your eyes,



This morning on MSNBC Reverend Al Sharpton had a similar view.


Monday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” network host Al Sharpton addressed what he referred to as “latte liberals,” who he described as liberals who are not aware of the progress being made in the black community as they sit in the Hamptons and drink lattes.
Sharpton lamented that a particular group of liberals has “taken advantage” of the “pain” of black people and people of the LGBTQ community rather than trying to ease their pain.

Certainly, we shouldn’t sit back and congratulate ourselves, but we should not condemn ourselves for the steps and the progress that has been made.

And I think that one of the problems that we have, which is why I call them latte liberals, is we’re having people assess what has happened that they were not the ones that it was happening to. So if you’re sitting around sipping lattes in the Hamptons talking about what’s going on in Harlem, you may not know the progress that we have made in terms of going from not being able to vote, in my mother and father’s generation, to electing a black president in my generation because you were never discriminated against. And I think that a lot of people have taken advantage of our pain rather than trying to ease our pain, whether it comes to race, whether it comes to gender, whether it comes to those in Really, I think it is also antithetical to keeping movements going to act like we’re not making progress,” he continued. “People need victories to keep fighting. People need to know that they’re not having an endless battle that will ultimately lead to defeat.

What empowers people is to know that they’re not fighting for nothing and that they are achieving things, so they keep going. And I think that there are those that are in the business of pessimism, and that dampens forward progress and dampens movements. It doesn’t advance them.”



So there you have similar opinions in Black and White.

[facilitatorn]

The Reverend you quoted actually says that since you have no clue you should completely shut the fuck up about the topic at least until you have purchased every title available at Powell’s and read them thoroughly. Then, you should still probably keep your stupid trap shut.

I hope you had a good Father’s Day, you odious toad-worm.

[facilitatorn]

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2021/6/21/2036300/-Powerful-Democrats-work-to-make-sure-that-infrastructure-is-paid-for-by-the-rich-not-the-rest-of-us

[bankshot1]

College athletes "Juneteenth" has arrived:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/21/1000310043/the-supreme-court-sides-with-ncaa-athletes-in-a-narrow-ruling

Seeing this shake out is going to be fascinating!

it seems pretty clear the "Other Nike"  will eventually step on the NCAA's ability to control pricing and paying student-athletes.

its tough to rationalize anti-trust powers screwing college athletes.

But somehow the SEC and B1G will prosper as the rich usually find a way to get richer.

It may be on a team basis above a league basis. The Big Flexible and Undetermined Amount and God's Conference may do better generally, but a prize 5 star prospect interested in monetizing his status ain't choosing Indiana or Purdue over Ohio State. Or Arkansas over Alabama or LSU.

I expect Bama and Duke and tOSU will all do fine, But, and this is the point, IU or whomever, can become a player for the 5-star recruits with price competition for talent. Business is business. And if IU can offer a better financial package than a traditional power, I wouldthink a 18 YO kid would have to listen. $500K per year at IU or free room and board at tOSU?
You'd have to give it some thought.

Shit, how much would you as the President of Clemson ok, for the school to pay Trevor Lawrence?

His value to the school had to be close to $100 million or more. And he got room and board and the NCAA deciding whether seconds on spaghetti was a breech of the rules.

Steinbrenner discovered the secret to rebuilding the Yankees in the 70s, and others soon followed.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Happy Birthday, Red States!

Households with recent birthdays were more likely to test positive with Covid in areas with high infection rates, according to an analysis of nearly 3m homes in the US.

The study, which emanates from health insurance claims data collected in the first 45 weeks of 2020 across the country, was designed to assess the potential risk of small gatherings on the spread of Covid-19.

The analysis showed that in places with low Covid prevalence, there was no evidence of any increased rate of infection in the weeks following birthdays.

But, in areas where the virus was circulating in the community, households with recent birthdays were roughly 30% more likely to have a Covid diagnosis, compared with households with no birthdays.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/21/birthdays-linked-to-spread-of-covid-in-areas-with-high-transmission

[Hamilton Samuels]

College athletes "Juneteenth" has arrived:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/21/1000310043/the-supreme-court-sides-with-ncaa-athletes-in-a-narrow-ruling

Seeing this shake out is going to be fascinating!

it seems pretty clear the "Other Nike"  will eventually step on the NCAA's ability to control pricing and paying student-athletes.

its tough to rationalize anti-trust powers screwing college athletes.

But somehow the SEC and B1G will prosper as the rich usually find a way to get richer.

It may be on a team basis above a league basis. The Big Flexible and Undetermined Amount and God's Conference may do better generally, but a prize 5 star prospect interested in monetizing his status ain't choosing Indiana or Purdue over Ohio State. Or Arkansas over Alabama or LSU.

I expect Bama and Duke and tOSU will all do fine, But, and this is the point, IU or whomever, can become a player for the 5-star recruits with price competition for talent. Business is business. And if IU can offer a better financial package than a traditional power, I wouldthink a 18 YO kid would have to listen. $500K per year at IU or free room and board at tOSU?
You'd have to give it some thought.

Shit, how much would you as the President of Clemson ok, for the school to pay Trevor Lawrence?

His value to the school had to be close to $100 million or more. And he got room and board and the NCAA deciding whether seconds on spaghetti was a breech of the rules.

Steinbrenner discovered the secret to rebuilding the Yankees in the 70s, and others soon followed.

I think you make some good points, here.

On a slightly different note, the SCOTUS was upset about a NCAA "monopoly" and its "price fixing". Aren't salary caps a bit of price-fixing? I'm not a labor lawyer, by any means, but I never quite understood why players would play in a league with a salary cap. MLB still doesn't really have one, but the NFL and other sports do.

Curious about how the law "work" when dealing with caps, and will the NCAA be able to introduce a cap in order to maintain itself and its power?

[Oilcanary]

From the Daily Kos link that Fac posted....an actual ON TOPIC post!

This means raising taxes on the rich. The majority of Democrats in Congress agree on that. They're trying to reestablish the idea that everyone paying their fair share of taxes is just how government is supposed to work, and they see this huge, absolutely essential, and highly popular  infrastructure proposal as the way to do it.

"What we're doing is generating revenue, but we are also making a major area of American government more fair, so people don’t feel they've been played while the rich person gets off scot-free," Sen. Ron. Wyden, the Oregon Democrat chairing the tax-writing Finance Committee, told The New York Times. He's been working on tax policy changes for corporations, the energy industry, and the rich. That means raising corporate taxes from the 2017 GOP tax scam rate of 21%—it was 35% pre-2017, and Democrats have proposed rates of 25% and 28%. They should go back to 35%, but we'll see how much they want to fix this.

Wyden's team is eyeing a couple of other 2017 measures, including one that’s letting millionaires using partnerships and limited liability companies take a tax break meant for small businesses, and the carried-interest loophole that allows private equity firms to claim the fees they get from clients as capital gains (taxed at 20%) instead of income (taxed at 37%). Wyden is also proposing getting rid of a range of tax breaks—44 separate provisions—that give the fossil fuel industry a windfall and replacing them with tax breaks for green energy producers.

For the super-rich, Biden wants to raise the top tax bracket from 37% to 39.6% and to tax stock sales for millionaires as income rather than capital gains. There's support for that among rank-and-file Democrats in Congress. "Taxes need to be raised on corporations and need to be raised on that wealthiest of people who got a terrible, tremendous windfall from the Trump tax game," Rep. Steve Cohen a Democrat of Tennessee, told the Times.

Voters like the idea, too. As Kerry Eleveld writes, "For nearly two decades, more than two-thirds of American taxpayers have told Gallup they don't think corporations pay their fair share in taxes … In fact, just a couple months ago, Pew Research Center polling found that at least 80% of Americans said one of their biggest complaints about the federal tax system was the fact that some corporations and wealthy individuals don't pay their fair share."

80 percent.  Time for our elected reps to start listening to their constituents.  This just makes sense.  And how many of those rich people got rich on the backs of people working really hard for meager wages?  If anything, Democrat's proposals are too tame.  It is time to stop apologizing for long overdue wealth distribution.  Who really earns our nation's wealth - some dude in an office masturbating with numbers on a screen, or someone busting their hump in a sawmill where it's 110 inside and the air is full of sawdust? 

[Hamilton Samuels]

The Southwest drought. Maybe you should move.

John Wesley Powell, the one-armed US army civil war veteran who led the first white expedition down the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon – a daring boat run in 1869 – later became an ethnographer who wrote a prescient 1878 government paper titled: Report on the Lands of the Arid Regions of the United States. In it, he unflinchingly described the scarcity of water, and summarized that much of the American south-west, if it must be settled, should be settled lightly and modestly. Overpopulate it, and it will be unforgiving.

 
Wallace Stegner, the dean of western writers, observed, “As a government scientist, Major Powell was now defying ignorance. He was taking on vested interests and the vested prejudices by which they maintained themselves.”
 
In short, Powell was a sage.

Nobody listened to him.



https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/16/american-south-west-drought-water


Couple that with this: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/slideshows/these-are-the-10-fastest-growing-states-in-america

Soon, you bastards will have your hand out and wanting the Northeast to bail you out of your stupidity, once again.

No thank you. Move.

[facilitatorn]

Many will leave, Ham. Some who’ve staked turf by the Pacific coast will turn some of our abundant sun and wind to desalinate some of that fairly large body of water commensurate with reasonable use storing charge in the briny byproduct.

The red state brithday-preburial bashes, along with the marathon shootathons and fentanyl, will insure the climate refugees from the arid states will all have somewhere to go.

[Hamilton Samuels]

From the Daily Kos link that Fac posted....an actual ON TOPIC post!

This means raising taxes on the rich. The majority of Democrats in Congress agree on that. They're trying to reestablish the idea that everyone paying their fair share of taxes is just how government is supposed to work, and they see this huge, absolutely essential, and highly popular  infrastructure proposal as the way to do it.

"What we're doing is generating revenue, but we are also making a major area of American government more fair, so people don’t feel they've been played while the rich person gets off scot-free," Sen. Ron. Wyden, the Oregon Democrat chairing the tax-writing Finance Committee, told The New York Times. He's been working on tax policy changes for corporations, the energy industry, and the rich. That means raising corporate taxes from the 2017 GOP tax scam rate of 21%—it was 35% pre-2017, and Democrats have proposed rates of 25% and 28%. They should go back to 35%, but we'll see how much they want to fix this.

Wyden's team is eyeing a couple of other 2017 measures, including one that’s letting millionaires using partnerships and limited liability companies take a tax break meant for small businesses, and the carried-interest loophole that allows private equity firms to claim the fees they get from clients as capital gains (taxed at 20%) instead of income (taxed at 37%). Wyden is also proposing getting rid of a range of tax breaks—44 separate provisions—that give the fossil fuel industry a windfall and replacing them with tax breaks for green energy producers.

For the super-rich, Biden wants to raise the top tax bracket from 37% to 39.6% and to tax stock sales for millionaires as income rather than capital gains. There's support for that among rank-and-file Democrats in Congress. "Taxes need to be raised on corporations and need to be raised on that wealthiest of people who got a terrible, tremendous windfall from the Trump tax game," Rep. Steve Cohen a Democrat of Tennessee, told the Times.

Voters like the idea, too. As Kerry Eleveld writes, "For nearly two decades, more than two-thirds of American taxpayers have told Gallup they don't think corporations pay their fair share in taxes … In fact, just a couple months ago, Pew Research Center polling found that at least 80% of Americans said one of their biggest complaints about the federal tax system was the fact that some corporations and wealthy individuals don't pay their fair share."

80 percent.  Time for our elected reps to start listening to their constituents.  This just makes sense.  And how many of those rich people got rich on the backs of people working really hard for meager wages?  If anything, Democrat's proposals are too tame.  It is time to stop apologizing for long overdue wealth distribution.  Who really earns our nation's wealth - some dude in an office masturbating with numbers on a screen, or someone busting their hump in a sawmill where it's 110 inside and the air is full of sawdust?

Here is some food for your thought on this complex matter: 1. Wealth inequality has increased but is not exploding.

The share of domestic wealth held by the wealthiest 0.1% of Americans rose from 7% to 14% over the past four decades, 1978–2016.[4] That increase is significant, but it is only half as large as the estimates that proponents of a wealth tax frequently cite.
The richest Americans tend to be self-made entrepreneurs: 67% of the Forbes 400 richest Americans are self-made, and eight of the top 10 all got to where they are by creating successful businesses.

There is no evidence that reducing wealth inequality will increase economic growth. It may even harm growth because it discourages saving and investment.

2. Of all the possible types of ways to collect revenue, wealth taxes are the least desirable.

Wealth taxes are inefficient and ineffective because wealth is inherently more difficult to measure. Privately held companies, for example, are not traded in public markets, which means that there are no stock prices by which one can objectively gauge their value. Also, financial assets can be hidden or moved abroad with the click of a mouse or converted into other assets that are hard to value.

A dozen European countries had a wealth tax in 1990, but most abandoned them because they were ineffective and expensive to administer. In part, the taxes failed to raise much revenue because wealthy individuals easily moved their assets across borders to avoid taxation. Today, only Switzerland, Norway, Belgium, and Spain still have wealth taxes, but the rates—0.3%–1%, 0.85%, 0.15%, and 0.2%–2.5%, respectively—are much lower than the 2%–6% proposed by advocates such as Senator Elizabeth Warren for the United States. With a small enough rate, there is much less incentive to evade the tax, but far less revenue is raised. Switzerland collects the most from its wealth tax; and it only brings in about 3% of its tax revenue.[5]

Wealth taxes distort behavior in a way that is harmful to economic growth and national prosperity. By taking a fraction of people’s wealth each year, the tax reduces the return to investing and discourages saving. This can reduce growth because investing and capital accumulation are critical to innovation.

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/whats-wrong-with-a-wealth-tax

I know that only addresses part of what you posted, but it is interesting.

[facilitatorn]

From the Daily Kos link that Fac posted....an actual ON TOPIC post!

And there’s more!

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2021/6/21/2036302/-Biden-Should-Withhold-What-s-Most-Sacred-to-Rightwing-Churches-Money

There’s a law on the books just for that…

[facilitatorn]

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/whats-wrong-with-a-wealth-tax

I know that only addresses part of what you posted, but it is interesting.

It’s interesting if you are curious what institutionalized people paid to hate the idea of a wealth tax have to say on the matter.

They do make a key and widely understood point that any wealth tax must be accompanied by a clarification and extension of the laws governing accounting and reporting wealth to accommodate that fact that it needs to be fairly evaluated as it is being subject to tax.

The self made oligarchs for the most part all say tax us already and build up as much of this country and this planet as you can out of ruin and despair. At least that’s their statement publicly. There is every good reason to test the sincerity of these American oligarchs’ civic mindedness.