“All U.S. economic problems are the result of Republican actions and especially republican ways of thinking - i.e. it's every man (woman and child) for themselves in a never ending struggle to gain every last dollar.
As long as the Republican party is perceived as normal and main stream 90% of U.S. citizens will continue to suffer.”
“This question is for registered Democrats only:
Assume (for the sake of argument and/or this discussion) that 95% of all elected Republicans don't care one bit about 90% of the U.S. population to the point where they don't distinguish between non rich Americans and non rich people of any country in the world - i.e. we're all nameless, faceless rabble to them.
“The only problem U.S. companies may run into is when U.S. citizens finally do not earn enough to afford the goods and services these companies need to stay afloat.
Right now, and for basically the last 30 years, easy credit (so putting u.s. citizens into further and further debt) has filled the gap between what Americans buy and what they actually can afford.
But is this sustainable forever?”
andrejgasp on Dec 7, 2013 at 08:58:10
“that is a great point and a great mistake that the rich are doing. Without an strong middle class financialy strong enough to be a non critical consumer of all the junk available around, the rich are losing their own base for survival / growth.”
“" ... government supporting everyone" which should be a strength for the U.S. since we have so many people and a democratic republic but in realty it is a weakness for us because of our vast diversity - brought on by decades and decades of importing cheap labor - means we have so many different groups who flat out do not like or trust one another and therefore are always looking for ways to hurt some "others" instead of helping one another (ie "spread the wealth").
More homogenized industrialized societies are much more comfortable with everyone paying in the a large pot (run by the gov't) and having those funds redistributed for all kinds of services (health care first and foremost). Here in the U.S.A. most citizens embrace the philosophy of trying to get as much as they can for themselves and theirs (including from the gov't) but deplore the very idea of anybody else - especially some group who "is not like me" - getting anything at all.”
“It's not the officials job to stop the clock for a team without timeouts who is driving for a potential tying touchdown. It is however the officials job to make the correct call and not confuse the offense.”
“You're confusing the third and 4th down plays. No reason to believe the Redskins would have run on 3rd and inches. Likely they would have called the same pass play.
By the time 4th down and inches rolled around they really did know it was 4th and inches and not 2nd down & 10 (or they should have) and what did they do? Not run for the 1st but pass down field yet again.”
StopTalkingDoSomething34 on Dec 2, 2013 at 13:21:49
“"Likely they would have called the same pass play."
No. It's just likely they would have called "A" pass play. Different circumstances call for different plays.”
“Wasn't it 3rd down and inches, not 4th? Didn't RGIII throw incomplete on 3rd, then completed a pass for the first down on 4th only to have the ball stolen out of Moss' hands, effectively ending the game?
If I'm wrong I apologize in advance and you're correct because if the officals' mistake caused Wash. to throw on 4th down instead of running for the 1st it would have been crimminal BUT if it's the difference between 1st and 10 vs. 3rd and inches, Wash.'s play selection - a pass down the middle - might not have changed very much, if at all.”
“No need to keep giving me history lessons about how and when and what makes up NFL divisions, I know as much about NFL history as anybody.
I am advocating for the NFL to throw out all old rivalries and any left over NFL/AFL nostalgia in favor of divisions that reflect regional rivalries. Few if any NFL fans now care about NFL/AFL distictions which is what is probably holding back the old men who run the league from developing more logical divisions based on geography.”
“I do not care about current NFL rivalries. The idea is to create new, better, more intense ones by realigning the teams by geography (as best as possible, there are no perfect alignments).
For instance the "Big East" would be Giants, Jets, Pats, Bills. The "Mid Atlantic" division would be Washington, Baltimore, Carolina, Tennessee.”
“Stopping the clock for a team without any timeouts (or even if they have timeouts) is flat out the wrong thing to do. The real mess up came from the chain gang who moved the chains as if it were a first down.”
tracerhaha1 on Dec 2, 2013 at 15:13:14
“Officials stop the game clock all of the time to review plays.”
“It was terrible officiating no doubt but I don't see how it effected the closing minutes significantly.”
CraigVale on Dec 2, 2013 at 11:12:02
“Had the correct call ( 4th and a yard to go) been made. They likely wouldn't have had to take a risky pass play to the line of scrimmage and just run the ball instead. It's pure speculation but something needs to be done.”
“Yes, time for the NFL to realign all divisions more geographically.”
cybolt on Dec 2, 2013 at 16:40:58
“Gonna get a lot of resistance there, especially since they just did it... when... '01 or '02?”
ladyvader on Dec 2, 2013 at 09:21:12
The old AFC East was Miami, New England, New York Jets, Indy/Baltimore Colts, and Buffalo. The Colts were from the NFL when the leagues merged in 1970. Removing Indy, putting them in the South makes sense. That leaves the old AFC rivalries in place.”
ladyvader on Dec 2, 2013 at 09:18:59
“No, the divisions are perfect the way they are. They keep the historical rivalries in tack. They did that when they realigned the league in 2002, the geographical aspect of it.
Old AFC Central was Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincy, Houston/Tennessee, Jacksonville, and the Ravens when the Browns move. Tenn and Jacksonville are in the same division the AFC South along with Houston, Indy isn't in the south, but their the closest team left in the area.
AFC North is Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincy, and Baltimore.
How do you aligned differently? I can break down all the divisions if you want.
NFC Central--Green Bay, Tampa Bay, Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit
NFC North-Green Bay, Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit
NFC South-Tampa Bay, New Orleans, Carolina, Atlanta
What's the issue with that alignment?
You don't like how the AFL teams stuck together to form the AFC West and AFC East? Those were old AFL alignment and have bitter rivalries between those teams. Do you honestly think KC fans want to be in a division without their main rivals, Oakland and Denver?
There are two teams not near their division foes. Dallas and St. Louis. Rams used to be in LA and was there the longest of the three cities they've been in throughout their history and Dallas has always been in the NFC East.
Dec 1, 2013 at 10:03:10
“I agree it's time to move beyond Citizen Kane but Vertigo is simply a random choice, more honoring Hitchcock's body of work than anything else and Hitch had at least a half dozen films better than Vertigo.”