FrankWheeler

2 hours ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Yup.  They spend millions on over 400 employees in the athletic dept and they media relations is poor at best.   They really dont have a Sports Info Director.  Their videos are few and far between and pressers are hard to hear and etc.  I dont know why they cant find a media room without all the background chatter.   Sloppy and semi-pro at best.  Used to be much better imo.  

Weren't you complaining about videos in another thread? 

1 minute ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Hm.   Hope the numbers are more useful than the grade school caliber videos.   Probably wont see any value there either.  

20 hours ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

I sure hope the AD doesnt spend $ on these little videos.  Most are worthless.   Why put them out ?   

On 2/26/2020 at 6:03 PM, BigRedBuster said:

I'm just sad it's affecting beer.

Drink better beer

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

@Notre Dame Joe

 

care to explain?

 

 

Is this socialism?

1 minute ago, TGHusker said:

I think you missed Landlord's and Blitz's posts.  - my primary aim.

The first quote was Landlords 

11 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

The fierce defense of Bernie's plan seems to tell us that.  Of course it won't fix everything.  But I don't think it helps anything at the root cause level. 

I went back through and read the last few pages again, who is fiercely defending Bernie's worker shareholder plan? 

Here are comments from some people who seem to be supporting Sanders.  

Quote

I don't know how I feel about that plan of Bernie's, 

and

Quote

I guess I am not totally on board with this, either.

and 

Quote

I'm not sure if Bernie's plan is the best one

and 

Quote

Yea that seems a bit extreme for even a dem controlled congress.

1 minute ago, Nebfanatic said:

Who said that one policy would fix everything? 

Good point, lots of focus on one policy that will never pass through congress.

14 minutes ago, teachercd said:

f#&% it, I am going to start my own business.  From what I can gather from a lot of you it is super easy to do and there is no chance of it failing and I will be super rich.

It's actually pretty hard and rare...The percentage of firms to achieve sales of $100 million or more has remained pretty much the same since 1980, at 0.04% (that's 4 hundredths of one percent).  (Of course that is counting all businesses that start up, which some posters say you can't do...?)

According to IRS stats from 2013, out of 5,887,804 corporations only 18,504 had receipts over $100 million (0.3%).  

But I believe in you!

8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

You do realize that the value of the company isn’t necessarily tied to the income of the owners, right?

 

Nobody has said if these employees that were Given stock are also going to guarantee loans and inject capital if needed. 

You can ask the employees when they get the stock if they would like to do those things?

34 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

You just can’t get through your head that this is totally different than minimum wage, can you?

They are both just tools for wealth redistribution.  

17 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Can someone answer these questions?

I am homeless and unemployed so not a corporate lawyer but generally shareholders are not personally liablefor the debts of the corporation.

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

Why does that stat matter?

Because you said these businesses happen all the time? And it’s not true?

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

What on Gods green earth makes forcing a business owner to give away their company stock if it gets a certain size make sense?

why are there small business exemptions for minimum wage?

4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

The only way that stat is true is if they are including every single business that is ever started. 
 

But, again...what difference does that make?

Why would certain businesses be excluded?

Yes, why try to make policy that is informed by facts and stats.

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

What the F*** difference does that make?

 

I know some aren’t going to grasp this. But, a $100 million company is not a HUGE mega corporation. 

9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Why?  There are companies started all the time that end up that large. 

Not sure the stats on this but it does seem pretty rare.  I found this quoted in a book with references but haven't seen the actual reference so it could be wrong:  

The percentage of firms to achieve sales of $100 million or more has remained pretty much the same since 1980, at 0.04% (that's 4 hundredths of one percent).  

Here's something for you guys to consider. Under the current economic system you probably aren't going to start a $100 million company or know anybody that will.

4 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I had a friend that started a business...the amount of time, money, resources ect that went into it was AMAZING.  And...he paid the people that worked for him 25% more than what other businesses in his field were paying.  He bent over backwards for that business and his workers and in the end it lasted about 1.5 years.  The idea of having to give even more away, unreal.

I don't think he would have been impacted by Sanders' plan but he would have been by minimum wage laws.

2 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Okay.

Are you arguing to take Min wage away?

It's a slippery slope.

10 minutes ago, teachercd said:

No...minimum wage is fine.

 

But once you start the other part you have started something that can be a problem.

 

I think companies that want to do that should do that, I do not think it should be something that they are forced to do.

Why is it fine?  You are taking money away from the shareholders in either case.  The minimum wage law impacts small businesses more than Sanders' shareholder plan would.

32 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Yikes, this is a slippery slope.

Yes, first you give employees minimum wage and then provide them an stake in the success of the company?  

7 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

There's an easy way getting around it. We never called pass plays in the red zone. Like hardly ever. 

 

Is being in the top 3 of the conference all season in total yards per game bad?

7 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Three players on defense or offense combined? Our four guys that got invited are defensive players, so I'd have to agree with The Dude's assertion.

 

However, I'd also argue that when you take in the season as a whole our offense was the bigger reason we wound up with a losing record and our defense did all that it reasonably could in most of our games. I'd say the main exceptions there were the Purdue & Indiana games, but that's a different story.

Maryland has 2 RBs invited.  But I still don't think it means all that much to the talent level of the defense.  Arkansas has 3 defensive players invited and they were way more worser than Nebraska.

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

 

Flies directly in the face of the lack of talent excuse.

Does it?  Maryland has 3 players invited.  

21 minutes ago, teachercd said:

It really is amazing how many fans fall for the old "Coach is such an upstanding person" bit...

 

These guys are just like most of us, they are going to do what they need to do to "win"

You may not be an upstanding person, but don't speak for the rest of us.