All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Today
  2. Damn me. I reverse jinxed them. 1-5-2
  3. Yesterday
  4. Wow. Detroit still without a win. They are 0-5-2. That is impressively bad.
  5. Last week
  6. Nobody wants to give up on 10-20M. Hell, 24M (the difference between 7M and 10M for 8 years).
  7. BSN reported several times that his agent told Sakic they weren't at all interested in signing anything this past off-season.
  8. I wasn't talking fiscal year 2020. I was merely pointing out that 2018 ended up at $779 Billion, and that 2019's was estimated at a Trillion. I pointed out that there's no way Trump's 5% cuts gets the deficit down to $63 Billion by year 4, and that it wasn't what was claimed - especially since he said he wouldn't cut the military spending below $700 Billion (where four years of 5% cuts would take it down under $600 Billion). You can't simply take the almost $4 Trillion, multiple it by 0.95%, then multiply that result by 0.95% for the following year, and so on, until you've cut away $1 Trillion. Why? Because that's not how ANY of this works. A large portion of the costs come back in again as tax receipts while having actually done something along the way. The federal budget is NOTHING like a household budget, though, because (extremely simplified) an economy ebbs and flows with the speed of the movement of money. Yes, money can totally "get stuck" in government spending toward where that money does more good if it's invested within the real world, but that's also not always the case. It's a delicate balance and different government functions obviously spend their money differently. Grizzly jumped in and said there's going to be no deficit at all at the end of Trump's presidency, which... it's not freaking possible even if he pulls a rabbit out of a hat, especially as if he's given another 4 years after this term, it's likely to include the next recession (same goes if a Democrat takes over - a recession is going to happen sooner or later again). I'd be completely good with talking about mandatory spending too - I have no problem cleaning up Medicare AND Medicaid. Hell, give the Medicare Fraud Strike Task Force more money - their ROI has been positive and could probably be even more positive given more resources. Giving them a few hundred Million more to catch a few Billion dollars more in fraud seems like a pretty huge win-win. SNAP, contrary to popular belief, is completely fine the way it is. Want to see something that generates a lot of economic activity? SNAP's pretty much the poster child. Does that mean I want to expand the program? I mean, potentially? But it's definitely a game of diminishing returns as there is an optimal size of the program, and that optimum will vary with the state of the economy as well. Mostly I'm annoyed with people pretending that the tax cuts did NOT increase the deficits, though, and the worst part is that their BIG effect will be felt when the economy turns south again. Sure, you could argue that $350+ Billion in stock buyback from major corporations is great for people who are heavily vested in the stock market, but for most people? No. It was literally promised that these tax cuts would pay for themselves and the Heritage Foundation is trying to claim they are. But that's not happening. It's not going to happen either. And please don't go quoting Brian Wesbury, he's misrepresenting numbers by cherry-picking dates and ignoring inflation. I also don't care what the Democrats say or do at this point, because they're not the ones in full control of the ship right now. I've never made the claim that they wouldn't have done similarly bad things. Still, not all their ideas are bad just because Bernie's head is in some weird utopia where not every instance of medical providers will try to suck the government dry if you don't implement a lot of other practical changes first. I do happen to think medical care should not be up to your employer or whether you got lucky in the birth lottery, but there are no practical ways of making a change overnight. It might not be possible to change things well enough over the next 50 years because of the way things move, as not only does the healthcare industry itself need to change, but we, as human beings, also need to change how we feel about aging and treatments toward the end of life.
  9. Edit: Um...yeah, because the fiscal year is over. It's still just a guess, but a close one because the year is closing out. Edit #2: Just google the deficit projections and go back. Back in April the predictions were for it to be "over a trillion" and in January it was $1.025 trillion. When the tax cut first passed it was $1.3 trillion for this year, 2018. Just pointing out how off they were, which is actually kind of standard, but the direction isn't so, it's always a guess. just posted the budget for 2019.'s already fiscal year 2019. We are discussing fiscal year 2020 now. The President has to submit his budget request between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February. Then the CBO does it's thing, the committees consider the President's budget request and submit a budget resolution to the house by April 1st. The budget is supposed to be passed and submitted to the President for signature by the 15th of April for the fiscal year that starts that October 1st. You're a full year off. I'm tired and busy today and I have a ton of crap to do next week. Could we just skip to the end. Asmo: The deficit is still going up, Trump is bad. SBS: Now that you're on the right year, how could that be if all departments are taking a 5% cut? Asmo: I don't know the math doesn't make sense. SBS: Oh, did you not understand that the Presidential Budget Request and the budget/appropriations passed by Congress only affect about 34% of Federal government spending that being discretionary spending. Mandatory spending can only be changed by changes to we could cut discretionary spending by 50% and still not balance the budget. Asmo: What's mandatory spending. (Maybe you know part of it, I'll give that credit.) SBS: ...mandated by security, medicare, medicaid, CHIP, SSI, SNAP, unemployment comp., and interest on the debt. We need serious reforms to many of those to ever come close to trying to balance a budget because many are set to grow faster than the money that funds them. Asmo: But...Trump....spending...deficits. SBS: Show me ANY democrat willing to even talk about problems with SS, Medicare, etc., except the Bern who wants to increase the deficit by 3 times by his medicare for all plan that only even remotely attempts to pay for about 10% of the increased costs with additional taxes. Are you against that because of the cost? Asmo: No, medical care is a right and I don't care how much it costs. SBS: OK. So not really concerned about deficit spending as long as it's on what you want it to be spent on. Moving on to other, more important topics like I'm 1/1024 attack helicopter, why don't they have a bathroom for "attack helicopter."
  10. Rantanan is special. Dude's been the best player on the team IMO this year so far. and that's no disrespect to MaKinnon who has been outstanding at times as well.
  12. Good luck signing Rantanen for less than 8M now I'd still say that had Sakic offered him 7M for 8 years this summer, he might have signed that. Make that an even 7.5M for a 60M contract.
  13. 1st one bad, 2nd one good
  14. Any thoughts on Grubauer's 2 appearances?
  15. You said by year four. The current deficit of $762 Billion is not what the 5% would cut into. Here, the projection from the White House for next year's deficit is over $1 Trillion: Edit: it appears 2018's deficit was just revised to $779 Billion on Monday. Edit #2: Anybody who said this year's deficit would be $1.3 Trillion probably got that number from projections of 2023 or whatever the five year one was.
  16. Gonna miss the next game (despite the early start) - gonna party
  17. Lando: THREE hattricks in just over 11 months (Nov. 17th, Dec. 17th and Oct. 18th)
  18. I'm not sure what to think of this line. I'm excited to see Ghetto back. I hope he pairs well with Kam. I hope Bourque plays a defensive role allowing space for the other two. That's really the only way I see it working. I am happy to see Calvert move up with Soda. I think that will be a benefit for Soda to have a potentially stronger winger. Time will tell. I hope they don't get ran over like they have been in the last two games.
  19. Ghetto officially in tonight. He'll take the spot occupied by Dries on the wing with Kamenev and Bourque. This will arguably be the most skilled linemate Kamenev has ever had.
  20. Being a citizen of tribe and participating in that culture is Native American heritage. Having a minute amount of indigenous genes from South America is not heritage. Next thing is Democrats are going to start saying Bloomenthal was actually a Vietnam Vet. It's family lore that I am the God Emperor of Dune and also a vampire.
  21. is it going from a $1.05 trillion deficit when the current deficit is $762 billion. Is it magically going up again and then going down. I think you read that wrong. Also, look at what in those are conjecture about what random dude thinks will happen because that's what every one of them is. I just point this out because person who said that it's going up after cuts is also the same person that said this years deficit would be $1.3 trillion and it looks like it's around $762 billion so only about 40% off this year. Should I expect the same. Because you can read the article. But, she did list as a minority when it was in her benefit, then changed her mind when it wasn't. She doesn't have "indigenous heritage" or "Native American" heritage. She has LOWER than the average white person "indigenous" genes, but she has NEVER AND WILL NEVER have Native American heritage. Of course she isn't seeking it...because she can't. Because she's not Native American.
  22. I never said she claimed to be a citizen of a tribe, but the fact that she does not have North American Native American DNA in her remains
  23. Wait, no. That's not what the proposal says at all... it cuts it down to an increase in $63 Billion for that year over year 4. That is, budget deficit is still increasing... just at a slower pace. Instead of going from like $1.05 Trillion deficit to a $1.16 Trillion deficit, it'll go to a $1.11 Trillion deficit or whatever the numbers are. Don't get me wrong, I don't think the proposal itself is necessarily bad. It just doesn't eliminate the deficit by the end of Trump's term... not even close.
  24. Why didn't you quote this part? As for the video, once again - if it's family lore that she's native American, why would it be so crazy that her racist grandpa wouldn't let her mom marry her dad based upon that? Yeah, turns out she's wrong and not part Cherokee or Delaware, but that doesn't make the story wrong. She's got indigenous heritage, she just likely isn't descended from any of the major American tribes.
  25. there is no if there - we will have a balanced budget by the time he leaves office.
  26. Trump has asked all of the Departments to cut their budgets by 5%. Even the DoD gets a cut (not a cut in growth but an actual budget cut where it is lower than the previous year.) The proposed budget plan would bring the deficit down to $63 billion by the end of 5 years. It's the "Nickle plan." If Congress goes along...we could have a balanced budget by the time Trump leaves office if he get's re-elected. Cure the far-left bitching about how we have deficit spending AND how Trump is trying to stop the deficit spending.
  27. Video is a cruel mistress. The Atlantic said it this way... "But whatever Warren intended, the conversation about her test results predictably degenerated into a back-and-forth about whether she is or is not Native American—and the answer to that is clear. She is not. Even if she could show a direct lineage through tribal census rolls and genealogical records, Warren has not experienced the traditional and cultural ways of Native American life. To ascribe any power to a DNA-test result disempowers those Native Americans who do live according to their traditions. Native American identity is not one of biology, but of culture. And, crucially, “Native American” is a political designation that confers rights. If that designation becomes tied to a DNA test, it could threaten those rights."
  1. Load more activity