chasfh

Well, then, someone’s getting a makegood or a rebate.

And yet another blop. Man, is everything ever falling into place for the White Sox.

That was a hard hit single, for two runs. Dammit.

That terrible strike call really made that strikeout for Flaherty.

Another blop loads the bases. It’s not as though Flaherty is getting his brains beat out, which is why he’s not coming out of the game yet.

Well that was a bad luck pop up.

Yes

At the game last night with friends and we noticed that the sponsorship logo was face down during last night’s game, too. The prevailing conjecture was, someone’s check bounced.

Hey you kids, get off DJ’s lawn!

I agree with all this, and I still think he believes he can have both, perhaps because he is too mentally ill to see it's not possible, and furthermore, no one would ever have the guts to tell him so.

He honestly, truly believes he can have both.

And you were less obtuse this time! 🤣

That's all I've been saying all along, and my evidence is negotiating common sense honed by years of doing it for a living. If you know your adversary has a floor and you offer them something below that, you already know they're not going to take the offer. So, why bother making the offer at all? One reason could be to appear to your constituents that you've made an effort. That's not as uncommon as some may think. Another reason could be you want to establish a foothold in case your adversary doesn't get the floor number they want, and then you can be in position to have your offer seen as competitive after all. But that almost never works because most people see an offer that is outside the range of their expectations as being inherently unserious, and perhaps even a little insulting. Not as insulting as if Al had offered, say, 5/100, which would have been a super obvious insult. But if your you establish a floor number and your adversary's first offer in even a closed marketplace is below that, before anyone else even has a chance to make their own offer, then why would you take it? It's true Correa did not get end up with his $300 million contract, but he did get an offer well above that from the Giants, and that was proof of concept that he was worth that kind of money. He did end up accepting Minnesota's 3/105 because that reset the AAV for a subsequent contract. And it worked, since his second contract with the Twins included six guaranteed years of over $30MM salary, which he would not have gotten from an Avila contract. If all his club options kick in, Correa will end up with $297.1MM over 11 years, which is better than Avila's 10/275 deal would have been, although somewhat short of his $300 goal, and well short of the $350MM the Giants were willing to pay him even after the Avila offer, and before his injury reduced his overall haul.

The debate is about whether Avila knew Correa would turn down the lowball offer. I think Avila knew.

I assume this set of photographs was taken in the southern hemisphere?

Thrice-divorced woman "found god" to try to outrun her sketchy past.

He's not exactly this generation's Tom Selleck, is he?

Raise the minimum age on the young kids but don't raise it on us. I like the way you think. 😉😁 I think raising the income cap is the perfect solution, and I don't care if it's unfair because it is supposed to be a wealth transfer program, not a government-run individual pension fund. I don't think it's any more unfair than funding unemployment insurance with workers' taxes. Raise the cap to a million dollars. That seems like it would go a long way toward cutting down the shortfall.

Do you believe it's only 2.7%? I don't. Not anymore.

Sure thing, raise the minimum age for benefits from 62 to 70. That way, instead of only 15% of people dying before they can start to collect, 25% of people can die before they can collect. That should save the program a couple of bucks.

This would be an interesting 180 twist because the way SSI benefits work now, the higher income a worker has, the higher their SSI benefits will be, so people who are the most likely to have built retirement wealth through savings and investing are those cashing the highest Social Security checks.

It's that belief that makes it so sacrosanct as a program, but that doesn't mean they can;t privatize and force everyone to take their payments in crypto. Social Security was always designed to be a wealth transfer from current taxpayers to non-taxpaying people in need, such as retired workers (or their survivors) and disabled people.

What are they going to do with same-sex marriages already on the books?

I quite like the bar-like conversations they have during rain delays. It's the chucklehead stuff during actual play that I am less enamored of.