Weganator

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I'm interested to watch Sanon at Summer League.  From what I saw, that kid is very fast and he's a creative finisher.  Confident from behind the three point line.  Don't know what kind of defender or passer he is, but he looks like a good prospect.  Too skinny to play in the NBA right now, but he could do like Sato and come over in a few years when he's fully grown and be a contributor.

With how important PG play is for a Summer League team, I'm just excited that is not 'random scrub off the street' at the 1, not passing to our draft picks like they have a shot.

@CrypticVillain was just about to post that same video.

Watching it, he looks like the anti-Oubre coming out of college:

• Good Handles
• Good Passer
• Seems to be able to finish with both hands
• The windup on his 3 point shot looks like me practicing in the gym though.. at the 4 min mark, you can see him take a 3.. takes a full second to get the ball off.

Last bit of venting / ranting before bed.. but don't the Capital City GoGo start playing this year?

Couldn't we actually draft somebody with a shot at playing this year with our own d league team as a fall back plan instead of euro stash?

Quote

While addressing reporters, Grunfeld was reminded about the handful of wings already on the roster and quipped, “Now we have one more.”

What a total jerk. If he had even a modicum of success, he could pull off the Pop interview style. But he is so bad it's just embarrassing.

2 minutes ago, CRobi21 said:

 

Gotta Photoshop the Stanley cup in there so he can be extra obnoxious and talk down to us even further.

Let me preface this with, I'm not a fan of this this draft.. the Stockholm syndrome / abused wizards fan in me is trying to figure out how many teams you actually need a viable 5 vs going small.

Mby there is some 4d chess going on, but more likely it's "Sorry!" with some pieces missing.

1 minute ago, CRobi21 said:

War room. Empty.

#TrustTheProcess... 

Womp womp

4 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

My wager is on a Euro stash at 44.

Speaking of which, I heard Aaron White had an okay season before losing to Vesely's team.. think it was in the quarterfinals.

Read somewhere he is gonna get another shot this summer. 

Brown being a good facilitator / not a ball stopper could be big for the second unit. Sato depends a bit more on making cuts / spot ups than creating a shot for himself.

Not really crazy about any of the bigs left, mby a combo forward with some range. I could live with a guard if it means Jodie Meeks and Mr TBD 10 day contract, that ends up sucking, never see the floor.

3 minutes ago, Zguy28 said:

That Jon Favreau tweet with the pic of kids in a cage in 2014 is in this thread in the last couple pages.

Good stuff. I avoid this sub like the plague, so I likely missed it. Just have a boring day today and wasn't sure if people were unaware of it since they talk as if it started Jan 20, 2017.

47 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

What was the previous policy?

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdf

In late 2014 DHS issued new guidelines emphasizing using additional discretion around focusing on terrorists and criminals, going away from a broader more aggressive approach. This is why the deportation numbers went down near the end of O's presidency.

In terms of the 'jailing children' policy, that is old and we have evidence of it happening as far back as 2014.

NYT's Editors clarification to a deleted tweet where he shared a photo of kids from 2014 and tried to blame on Trump.

https://twitter.com/jakesilverstein/status/1000837340187774976 

43 minutes ago, twa said:

 

What exactly do you suggest we do with them and their parents?

 

 

Separating them from their kids is wrong.

Moving the kids to jail with the parents seems harsh.

Moving the parents to where the kids are kept could be possible, but that might require more facilities to keep more ppl there. Especially once it's clear you go to a different, likely much safer facility than jail.

They could be immediately deported, so that they aren't being detained.

1 minute ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

But why cap it at all? Especially if you are trying to sell it as tax cuts?

 

Quote

Increases the cost of government on those receiving the government. Increasing the price of a good / service reduces demand.

 

Put another way, unless the policies those states have in place make tax payers lives better by a good enough margin to justify the cost, citizens will demand change or move

14 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

But that does nothing to explain why the GOP wants to cap the SALT deduction at 10k. 

Because not every state has varying rates for individual and joint filers was my point. But yes, the particular number is arbitrary, but at least semi means tested.

You need to make 170k in order to pay 10k in CA state taxes. Homeowners there could get pretty shafted since it eats into that number.

3 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

What are you talking about? I'm talking about the new 10k cap for SALT deductions that the GOP will institute for the Federal tax return.

 

If the idea is that they should be limited, why is it the same limit for both individuals and joint returns? Shouldnt it really be tied to the # of filers on a return? Otherwise, it's punitive for 2 income families. It is, like I said, not a tax cut for a lot us, as some would like to believe.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/state-taxes-washington-d-c.aspx/amp/

DC has the same brackets for individual and joint filers.. it is punitive.

4 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

But why is it the same cap for individual and joint returns?

Some states don't differentiate between individual and joint rates because it favors traditional families or some BS. DC follows this, not sure about other states rates.

6 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

What is the purpose of the GOP capping SALT deductions at 10k?

Increases the cost of government on those receiving the government. Increasing the price of a good / service reduces demand.

Put another way, unless the policies those states have in place make tax payers lives better by a good enough margin to justify the cost, citizens will demand change or move.

44 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

I am fairly certain they can't legislate this the way Ted Cruz is pretending. The middle class tax cuts weren't permanent for budgetary reasons. You can't go back and wave a magic pixie wand and make them permanent without seriously disrupting the math behind the overall tax cut.

It was because legislation that cbo'd at more than 1.5T needed 60 votes. Expiring at 10 yrs met that.

I don't know how rules would apply with it being a separate piece of legislation, but it only takes 9 Dems crossing the aisle to do that at worst. And with how it's being bemoaned by them it would be interesting to watch them put their foots in their mouths by voting against it.

Good news! Looks like they will be permanent cuts after all. Unless all of the complaints about it "only being 10 years"  now are grandstanding and not because they couldn't get the 9 more votes at that duration.

3 minutes ago, twa said:

 

ya left out obesity , them pudgy fingers can't grip a pitchfork well

The amount of french revolution style call to arms I see around here makes me want to start leveraging my 2nd amendment rights... gotta get out of DC first though

12 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Hardly. 

 

We are already seeing diminished services and threats of diminished services.

Health Care

Education

Infrastructure

Environmental Protections like clean water

etc.

 

All of these need to be paid for. Less revenue means less ability to pay. Social services and the safety net will be the first thing to go. Sadly, this is what the GOP wants. They want to gut education. They want to poison our waters. They want to let corporations freely pollute without consequence to their hearts' content. They want people with no access to health care.

Fair enough, but people with negative net tax rates aren't up in arms about the tax changes because of infrastructure. The reason that negative tax rate is even possible is because of the redistribution they are receiving. That can be cut.

A bunch of that other stuff has multiple schools of thought as to their necessity and can be hashed out in other fora.

6 minutes ago, Burgold said:

It's really not.

 

Think of it this way. If I give you 500 bucks you're probably happy about it. If the next year I give you 500 bucks more than the previous year you ought to be even happier. After all, you have a thousand bucks. However, if you have a thousand bucks in your pockets, but I subsequently charge you $25,000 for health care, $9,000 for road repair, and another $100,000 for odds and ends that I'm no longer covering... that thousand bucks will feel pretty pathetic.

 

The GOP bill is suckering people to get excited about accepting pennies while stealing hundreds of dollars in services.

The implication is that the extra 1k is negating those services for me. The only way I'll see a drop of government service is if we go single payer and then my 'medical costs' will be closer to my mortgages.

17 minutes ago, Burgold said:

And when they break out that argument you know they are out of ammo. 

 

The problem with this bill is that there is no real positive spin. It increases the deficit and debt in a massive way. It cuts services in a massive way. It will actually be more expensive for many middle and lower class families. The only group that it benefits is the donor class. It's a crap bill and every analysis, conservative, liberal, think tank, economist, and academic, pretty much says so.

It's more about if you net out positively, but believe this is a great harm, there is a means for you to provide more funds to the super efficient government.

Otherwise it's just ppl that don't net out paying taxes after benefits complaining about ppl being robbed less. You can choose to pay extra, but I go to prison if I can't / don't cover whatever percentage of my efforts  you believe I owe for choosing to spend that time earning.

6 minutes ago, Grumpy Vet said:

 

Thanks for posting @Weganator

No problem! Sorry it's not clear cut better you. I'm rooting for you in reconciliation.