1984Echoes

Chicago Blackhawks, 15-20-7, 7-12-4 AWAY TNT 1/26 7:30 PM Detroit Red Wings, 18-18-6, 13-6-3 HOME

Love that movie.

He dug through walls with his rock hammer to gain freedom.

Isn't the definition for Archie Bunker in Webster's Dictionary: "deliberately obtuse"?

Excellent buying opportunity right now... I put some money into the market this morning when all the Chicken Littles were running for the hills. That's where Archie Bunker lives, right? In the Hills of the Rio Grande?

He's a fascist who attempted to overthrow the United States Government. He gets what he deserves. No matter the list of extensive skillsets that you've pointed out.

GO STAFFORD GO!!!

Yeah I don't like that idea. How about instead, that if a team loses any significant time to an official's error (and really this is only at the end of the game or end of the half or in the last two minutes...): The Head Coach can toss a challenge flag. Allow a team to challenge an official's error based solely on time; whether that is 3 seconds or 10 seconds or whatever... That way a team is not penalized (loss of down? no way!) except for losing a timeout if a challenge is lost. Now, challenge flag rules apply, one per half and a TO must be available... OR, each team is given one special challenge per game reserved only for official's errors that impact game time. That way other challenges/ timeouts are not affected. No one's going to save a timeout just in case an official makes an error at the end of the game that kills the clock... I would want a special Official's Error Challenge Flag, one per each team, one per game, that challenges only the time lost due to official's error... Not going to happen but.. that's the way I'd approach it...

No words to say... Just a great big smile on my face... 😁

The Predators are good. Not worried about the Red Wings. We know they're not yet ready for prime time...

This is what a clueless Archie Bunker says, addled by partisan hackery... This is what someone says when they actually know what they are talking about.

Like Carlson Tucker and Archie Bunker. Two peas in a pod.

Yes, but I don't think it was ratified by US Congress until 1993... so it wasn't "official" until the ratification.

Thinking ahead.

They're ahead of the game.

Kreidler might have some pop in his bat and might be a useful player in MLB, but he was never a top 100 guy... But... I'm thinking you're being sarcastic here and my sarcasm-meter is currently on the fritz. Colorize the post to help out a friend...? Or /s?

FYI: That would be 1 out of 3. Or in terms if win-loss record: 1-2.

The export industry. Which, coincidentally... benefits manufacturing. That's the nuance of what I just posted above. A loss of manufacturing jobs, but gains in other high-paying jobs like export. A 2% decrease in unemployment after NAFTA compared to the 2% higher in the previous decade. 27 million gross employment gain over the following decade. But a loss in negotiating power for blue collar manufacturers. It's a very mixed bag. But like every other previous decade in America, there were extensive changes and since we are a nation that always looks to the future... it's adapt or sink. A lot of new high-paying jobs... in IT, Engineering, etc... Coincidentally, I believe we have the same number of manufacturing jobs today 3.5 million, as we did in 1985, 3.5 million. Something like that... but I'd have to go check the numbers to verify how on or off I am on that.

Read the whole thing... please don't cherry pick: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA's_effect_on_United_States_employment#:~:text=According to the Economic Policy Institute's study%2C 61% of the,relatively high paying manufacturing jobs.

yeppers.

And it's also short-sighted to not get what you can. Like you said, find out what Manchin will do and get it done. It's something. That was accomplished. Get it done. Everything that is NOT done is what you run on in the next two elections: "If you want THIS then we need more Democrats elected! I will get this done when I get to the Senate (if pushing for a Republican seat) (or: I will lead this charge... if already there...).

Just FYI: I have no problem with NAFTA. I'm an Independent. Caucus with Centrist Democrats. This type of Republican ideas win with me. I'm on board with NAFTA. And TPP and other such... PS: George W Bush approved China's entry into the WTO. Also... the loss of high-paying manufacturing jobs is another, more complex issue. We were losing those jobs in the early 80's before NAFTA and the WTO. Steel, Auto, etc. were all getting hammered by cheap Japanese cars, gas-guzzling American cars affected by OPEC's shenanigans, etc. NAFTA didn't really affect manufacturing, at least IIRC the data shows that, but letting China into the WTO opened the floodgates.

And the free money has gone in the opposite direction multiple times, crashing the asset valuations of the upper class. So NO, not the biggest, and not even close to the changes in Tax Codes by Reagan and Trump that benefited the upper class and investing classes, and penalized middle class and lower class benefits and states. And when states lose Fed money what do they do? Raise taxes and cut state benefits... for middle and lower classes. Wrong, again. But like you said, it's more complex than just a simple statement like "raise taxes on the top 1%". Because the next issue is how those additional tax dollars are spent. On more support for states (I'll just use public education as an example)? That would lower State Tax burdens so an indirect benefit from tax the rich to benefit the middle and lower classes. How about something more direct? Increase income caps on FICA taxes to unlimited and lower everybody's FICA rates by 2%? That's a DIRECT benefit to the middle & lower classes at a cost to the top 5%. How about (wasn't it just in the news that the top 1%, or maybe it was 0.1%... pay on average 8% of their income in taxes?) a Minimum Required Tax, for anyone (no ifs, ands, deductions or buts), of 21%? I don't know what I pay... 30-33%. Great, lower everyone's tax rates by 2% by limiting tax avoidance by the top 1%. THAT's a direct benefit to middle/ lower classes at the expense of the highest of the upper class. And you're saying what? That the middle and lower classes would NOT benefit from simple corrections such as this? Or are you saying that the problem is bigger than just some extra $'s in their pockets and therefore, there are more issues to resolve than just the few $'s? You're right on that end. How about we fix the worst medical system in the civilized world? One that pauperizes people who get "too sick", availability that sucks, costs that suck, a middleman that offers NOTHING (medical insurance companies) in the way of medical services or savings...

NAFTA DOES have something to do with it... Oh... WAIT for it... It was started by Ronald Reagan, and brought to agreement under Bush. Oh... you thought because it started in 1993 that it was all Clinton? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement

Yeah, I think more guys will pop up on that list but need the time to show that they belong... Kreidler's not a part of that group though... I'd keep an eye on Madden, Pacheco, Campos & Santana on that basis...