Posts by Jack Johnson6

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:Man, I could have sworn I heard it...

What’s the point of a poll? Hardly anyone listens anyway. It’s not that we’re short on singers, it’s that the actual music is lacking. You can always manufacture a singer or a singerette.

All those singing competitions are living proof; once they win, someone just comes along and makes them a hit.

We don't even need hits, we need an actual genre. Something like our version of "turbo-folk"... and when I say turbo-folk, I mean modern country-pop vibes, not the absolute trashy stuff.

Well, Christina Aguilera, Maroon 5, and Taylor Swift—that’s basically your formula, and it works perfectly fine.

And Max Martin, obviously. It seems there's plenty of potential in the outskirts.

Morgan Scott82 said:Look at the sponsors under Nicollin and New Orleans. The Tourism Board and City sponsor the club, so there isn't much anyone can actually do about it.

In general, they could, but running a business involving a few million dollars in subsidies isn't their priority. It’s too small-scale for them; it won't be at the top of their agenda.

velvetlynx63 said:The English language doesn't really recognize terms like impression or virtually...

Here is the latest breakthrough from our local amateur linguists. The implications are staggering. This discovery completely reframes those thousands of books where the word "impression" was used—books we were foolishly told were classic American literature—and calls into question millions of people who used the term, effectively masquerading as true Americans. Now that we've exposed this fraud, we can finally purge this literary trash and linguistic toxin that has been polluting the soul of the American spirit.

Morgan Scott82 said:What kind of impact would that actually have on transfers or revenue? Would they even have to pay taxes if they remained a non-profit association? I suspect the laws governing non-profits weren't exactly designed for football clubs running 20 million dollar budgets. It's a stretch to expect them to operate as non-profits at that scale...

I'm not entirely sure how the statutes work here in the States, but in Germany, they pay taxes on transfers and other income regardless. It doesn't matter if you're a pure community association or if you have a professional wing set up as a corporation with the parent club holding a majority stake.

Morgan Scott82 said:Isn't it a legal obligation for all major league teams to convert into corporations? Even if it isn't, if you inherit a mountain of debt, unpaid taxes, and pure garbage, then restructuring is probably the easiest—maybe even the only—way out. It’s what the Tampa Bay Buccaneers would have to do in a similar spot. If you inherit clean books, sure, maybe there's no need for it. But it might be considered unfair competition if one set of rules applies to you while everyone else plays by different ones... which just brings us back to that moment of total chaos.

As for me wandering aimlessly through these thoughts, I'm asking those of you more informed than I am to help clear things up. 🙂

A club could technically function as a non-profit organization—hopefully a democratic one—while its commercial activities are taxed and regulated just like any other business entity. That way, there wouldn't be any issues with unfair competition.

jadewolf16 said:She bought an apartment in Monte Carlo just for the tax breaks. Even then, she picked a building where the cheapest unit is still $1.6 million.

The world number 30 in tennis makes more than the top female skier. And she doesn't spend half her career in rehab after surgery.

jadewolf16 said:By the time he started drilling into his daughter's head, he was already fifty-four. Back then, ideals and romance were long gone, especially for someone with his level of wisdom.

Besides, that first big appearance back in '94 was all about chasing—and frankly, deserving—the cash needed to fund further development.

If he was just drilling them for a paycheck, then the whole thing was a massive failure from day one.

Regardless of his age, Miller doesn't exactly give off that kind of vibe.

James Nguyen13 said:The reality we're facing is that the line between the government and big capital has basically vanished.
In this setup, you see capital essentially nudging the state to fund these groups that spend all their time shouting about how much they hate capitalism, when in reality, they aren't even tackling anything meaningful.

Ever since things started going downhill, everyone has been calling it a "crisis of capitalism" and pointing fingers at the system, all while the government is busy handing out billions in subsidies to private corporations!!

It's inevitable. Once an elite circle of major players forms, they’ll write the rules to suit themselves. The trick is for that elite to be smart enough to leave some breathing room for everyone else to actually build things and innovate. If they're too shortsighted to let outsiders in, society collapses—and they go down with it. Eventually, the public will just tear them out of power.

They’d never pull that off. This game is meaningless for Dortmund; they have Real Madrid coming up in a few days, so they'll sit the starters and rely on a bench that's paper-thin.

darktiger12 said:I guess France wasn't any better under that little guy who fancied himself a ladies' man (despite calling himself a "conservative"), nor was it any better under any of those crooks like Giscard, Mitterrand, and the rest before him. Didn't Sarkozy also hand over the government and key sectors to feminists and various "emancipated" "progressives," and then actually brag about it?

But honestly, countries like Spain and Ireland remain a complete mystery to me. I really don't get how these nations, which were so incredibly stubborn and deeply conservative Catholic societies for centuries, managed to degenerate so much and turn into what they are today in just 10 or 15 years. But like you said, I suppose everyone is starting to "enjoy" the fruits of their newly acquired "progressiveness."

The worst part, though, is that they are trying to force these same liberal nonsense policies—the ones that ruined them—onto the entire world, especially onto transition countries like ours.

It’s really not that deep. Spain and Ireland transitioned from mostly rural societies to countries dominated by urban populations. Any society undergoing that kind of urbanization inevitably sees massive shifts in its social fabric.

Strictly speaking, the current version of LA Galaxy was founded in 1998.

Adam Collins4 said:So, did Miller actually manage—if my memory serves me right—to prove the link between Ford Motor Company and Ford Motor Company? Because apparently, that sparked a massive feeding frenzy, and they moved lightning-fast to strike a deal just to bury the whole thing and make sure everyone forgets it ever happened...

I have no idea what "šsdd" is supposed to mean.

I don't know if Miller led the lawsuit against Real Madrid, but Smith certainly did.

Once he got the final ruling from the Supreme Court confirming he had a contract with the defunct Ford Motor Company—and that today's Real Madrid has zero ties to that specific entity—he threatened to demand that every single match played by FC Dallas be annulled. His logic? Since he didn't technically have a contract with the current club, his appearances were illegal. He even threatened to take it to the European Court of Human Rights and report everything to UEFA. In the end, Smith just ended up coaching youth players at Real Madrid.

Jamie Price said:I simply asked, "which club are we actually talking about?"

Because, clearly, we are discussing some club that was essentially wiped out, so I feel it might be somewhat pointless to dwell on its former name.

And the fact that some association decided to change its name isn't really the core issue of this discussion, I think.

Well, that group *is* the club. They competed under the name FC Dallas in '98 and '99.

Yeah, the current Real Madrid was founded in 1998 under the name FC Dallas.

Jamie Price said:Which club are we even talking about here?

"Smith filed a lawsuit against FC Dallas over an outstanding debt of $780,000, but the Supreme Court ultimately ruled that Real Madrid owes him nothing. It seems the reasoning is that the legal entity Ford Motor Company was dissolved, and the newly formed Dinamo Supporters Group isn't considered the legal successor to Ford Motor Company."

Henry Hernandez7 said:Maybe this is a bit off-topic, but I was wondering why Real Madrid didn't just start from the bottom after FC Dallas folded? And why are they counting all those trophies FC Dallas picked up during the Reagan era?

People keep getting this wrong. Today's Real Madrid wasn't actually founded when Ford Motor Company folded.

In 1998, the FC Dallas Supporters Group was formed. Before that, there was only the Ford Motor Company corporation. Since then, the group participates in competitions while players hold contracts with the actual corporation. The whole trick is that the federation allowed this newly formed supporters group to play in the first division. The Ford Motor Company corporation eventually went into bankruptcy and shut down, leaving everyone they owed money to empty-handed. Even though the supporters group changed its name to Real Madrid, it means nothing; it didn't change their legal status one bit. They could have kept the name Ford Motor Company until today and Smith still wouldn't have seen a dime.

So, the "job" was done by letting the supporters group play in the top league in '98 using players who were technically contracted to the corporation. Why was this allowed? Probably just because politics dictated it.

Exactly. It doesn't matter if you're hunting long shots or sticking to the heavy favorites. What matters is having a legitimate reason to believe the bet holds value.

The odds on under/over markets aren't going to be unrealistically low because casual bettors don't usually chase them. They mostly just hammer the favorites. That’s why you rarely see a decent payout when betting on the big names like Real Madrid, Manchester City, or Novak Djokovic.

Just because the odds on FanDuel look higher doesn't mean you're getting value.

Winning consistently really just boils down to one thing: being better at calculating probabilities than the market or the sportsbook.

That 1.22 line on FanDuel implies the market sees an 81.9% chance of it happening. To even break even once you factor in the commission, you'd need to nail those picks 82.6% of the time. Naturally, you actually want to make money, so you'll need to beat that number.

Unless you have a legitimate reason to believe your math is superior to the house, don't bother.

The issue with small odds is that most casual players hunt them exclusively. Because everyone piles in, the value evaporates. Finding a profitable bet at those levels is rare.

Elizabeth Hayes6 said:By the way, I don't even take the whole pill anymore. I've trained myself to just take a quarter. If I took the full dose, it would be "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....wait, are we in America already?!"

I just pop two as soon as I start moving. Usually, it’s just a 7 or 8-hour bus ride. I sleep through five or six hours and step off the bus feeling completely refreshed.

Old thread, but I was looking for something on this. Why is the OP so against taking tablets? Growing up, I used to get motion sickness constantly during road trips—it was honestly the worst thing ever until I started using Dramamine. Now, I don't care; I can pull a 20-hour trip without any issues.

Is there some serious side effect I'm missing, or is there just another reason people avoid them?

briskdrifter3 said:Alright, look—Spain might not be exactly the Promised Land, but there are plenty of other spots in Europe that are perfectly decent. All the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, Italy, maybe even France... I might even go so far as to say Canada (don't come for me on that one). You have to admit, in these places, you’ll earn a higher wage for the exact same job compared to what we see here in America—and you'll live better once you actually have your paperwork sorted... you know, a permanent residency and a proper work permit. I’m not even counting temporary gigs, because honestly, even if you're highly educated, the pay won't match.
For instance, a colleague of mine was over in the United Kingdom recently, and the place is absolutely swamped with people from Poland. He was in a neighborhood in some smaller town where you don't hear a word of English—just Polish—where even the street signs are in Polish. Historically, the United Kingdom had those restrictions limiting Poles to seven years maximum after joining the European Union.
We probably won't face those kinds of bans... since there are only about four million of us, most countries would likely assimilate us pretty quickly.

Actually, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Sweden were the only ones to fully open their doors back in 2004, which explains why everyone rushed there at once. The rest of us dealt with various transition periods—Germany and Austria had a maximum of seven years, which just recently expired.

They probably won't bother with exemptions for us. We're such a small group and we handle our own entries, so they can absorb us without any real trouble.

briskdrifter3 said:Has anyone else given serious thought to the mass exodus of labor once we join the European Union?
If we actually make the leap in 2013—though, if you ask me, that’s still a big "if"—and then endure several more years where we aren't even permitted to work abroad (since the member states get to decide whether to ban us for three, five, or seven years)... we are heading straight toward a massive wave of emigration from America. And I'm not just talking about individuals; we're looking at entire working-age families, including young children, packing up and leaving. Even now, there's already a significant number of people fleeing this swamp of a country, but once those bureaucratic hurdles are cleared... well, that exodus will multiply exponentially. It’s precisely what happened in Poland, the Czech Republic, and similar nations. They managed to absorb the shock somewhat successfully, mostly because they have larger populations and, frankly, much healthier economies than ours...
But what does this mean for us?
The ratio of employed people to dependents is currently sitting at roughly 1:1, and things are going to get significantly worse. Our highly educated youth—the very backbone of our workforce—will be the first to leave. These are the people who drive the consumer base that retailers rely on; young adults and young families are the primary drivers of spending. So, who is left to fund the budget through income tax? Who is going to shop at the malls and indirectly support the treasury? Pensioners? Minimum wage workers who can barely afford groceries? Or perhaps the merchants themselves, who would essentially be buying from their own shadows?
Joining the European Union threatens to trigger an economic collapse unlike anything we've seen; we are practically charging like sheep into a slaughterhouse. We won't even have recovered from the current crisis by the time we join; if anything, the entry will only deepen the wound. Compared to what lies ahead for us, Greece looks like a paradise.
In fact, I am personally weighing the option of moving abroad with my wife and child—and if an opportunity presents itself in a few years (one I intend to pursue actively rather than wait for), I am gone. Quite frankly, I couldn't care less about America or
my national identity. I might return once I retire, but my children will likely stay abroad. I am simply fed up with the incompetence here and the miserable wages. I possess specialized skills that are easily marketable overseas. Most of my friends are thinking along these exact same lines...

Staying out of the European Union just to prevent brain drain isn't a real solution. EU nations can still open their markets to workers from America even if we aren't members—just look at how other countries handled labor from the former America back in the day. What's your Plan B then? Close the borders and make it illegal to leave?

Brian Wood said:I honestly don't expect any massive exodus here. I mean, anyone who actually wants to pack up and leave can pretty much do it whenever they feel like it today; sure, it might be a little more of a hassle and
maybe a bit more complicated, but nothing is impossible, right? Personally, I'm thinking we'll probably just see a tiny trickle, maybe something similar to what happened in
Canada, so basically just a minimal amount of people moving on.

It’s actually quite a bit harder than people think. You can see this in the massive wave of Eastern Europeans who headed to the United Kingdom and Ireland back in 2004. It wasn't until the doors were swung wide open that we saw the true mass exodus. Plus, the Canadians are significantly wealthier than us—honestly, they were the wealthiest of the group joining back then, so it makes perfect sense that they had the least reason to leave.

Linda Johnson15 said:I honestly don't see it happening... they don't even seem to know how to handle their own people. If you're looking to move abroad for work, you’ve got to meet way more requirements and fight tooth and nail against the local workforce there.
The reality is, you'll have a slight edge over most of the world—take Norway, for example. They prioritize their own unemployed first, then Scandinavians, then those from the European Union, and finally everyone else. Joining the EU gives us a seat at one level of that ladder, but it’s not going to be a game-changer.

At the end of the day, a high-quality worker can land a job anywhere regardless of where they're from, especially if they've got specialized skills or they're top-tier experts.

Locals are mostly just worrying about competing with cheaper labor coming in from places like Romania and Bulgaria. Our people are too valuable to settle for entry-level roles just to survive—jobs they could easily grab abroad without any hassle—only to have someone from Bulgaria or Romania swoop in and take that same spot right under their noses. That's where the real friction is going to happen.

Unemployment in Northern Europe is staying pretty low and trending downward. We aren't trying to scale Everest here; we just want to catch up to everyone else in the European Union—assuming certain countries don't decide to take advantage of that seven-year grace period.

Linda Johnson15 said:I honestly don't see it happening... they don't even seem to know how to handle their own people. If you're looking to move abroad for work, you’ve got to meet way more requirements and fight tooth and nail against the local workforce there.
The reality is, you'll have a slight edge over most of the world—take Norway, for example. They prioritize their own unemployed first, then Scandinavians, then those from the European Union, and finally everyone else. Joining the EU gives us a seat at one level of that ladder, but it’s not going to be a game-changer.

At the end of the day, a high-quality worker can land a job anywhere regardless of where they're from, especially if they've got specialized skills or they're top-tier experts.

Locals are mostly just worrying about competing with cheaper labor coming in from places like Romania and Bulgaria. Our people are too valuable to settle for entry-level roles just to survive—jobs they could easily grab abroad without any hassle—only to have someone from Bulgaria or Romania swoop in and take that same spot right under their noses. That's where the real friction is going to happen.

Only a tiny fraction of people fall into that category. There are plenty of folks with "regular" jobs who will feel the impact quite heavily.

Linda Johnson15 said:I honestly don't see it happening... they don't even seem to know how to handle their own people. If you're looking to move abroad for work, you’ve got to meet way more requirements and fight tooth and nail against the local workforce there.
The reality is, you'll have a slight edge over most of the world—take Norway, for example. They prioritize their own unemployed first, then Scandinavians, then those from the European Union, and finally everyone else. Joining the EU gives us a seat at one level of that ladder, but it’s not going to be a game-changer.

At the end of the day, a high-quality worker can land a job anywhere regardless of where they're from, especially if they've got specialized skills or they're top-tier experts.

Locals are mostly just worrying about competing with cheaper labor coming in from places like Romania and Bulgaria. Our people are too valuable to settle for entry-level roles just to survive—jobs they could easily grab abroad without any hassle—only to have someone from Bulgaria or Romania swoop in and take that same spot right under their noses. That's where the real friction is going to happen.

Why would anyone from Bulgaria or Romania come to America when they have the rest of Western Europe wide open to them?

ironstag8 said:briskdrifter3, just take a look at where our young people are heading for school and what they’re actually graduating with—then tell me honestly, how many of them do you think will actually land a high-paying job out there in the States?

It might not be a high-paying job, but it'll pay better than what they can get in America, especially if their salary back home is $0.00.