DevoHusker

41 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

I'm not sure, but I think someone who's wealth is 25,000x more than a very livable wage is a reasonable place to start.

Here in the Midwest, $50,000 a year is a very livable wage. Under your calculations of a good place to start, that would equal an income of $1,250,000,000 ($1.25 billion). How many individuals in the US have that kind of personal income?...none that I can find. 

In 2018 only 205 individuals earned over $50 million, while 938 made between $20-50 million (including guys like Lebron James, Mike Trout and Clayton Kershaw). So about 1200 people made more than $20 million a year, out of approximately 130 million people who were employed in the US. In other words, .0000092 of the American workforce...

I for one, don't think that is a viable place to start, which means that the bar will be lowered, then lowered again....etc. So, again...

where does it stop?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-how-many-people-make-more-than-50-million-per-year-in-wages-2018-10-18

1 hour ago, Landlord said:

 

 

 

So you see no issue with individuals hoarding more wealth than they could possibly need, often at the expense of others under them who have to fight and break their backs to survive, 

 

but you do see issue with taking some wealth away from people who, even after it's taken away, will still have more wealth than they could possibly need, but the taken away part will help to create a more equitable ability to live well for everyone else? 

I haven't made up my mind on the redistribution issue...but one question that no one seems to answer: who decides how much is "too much"?

11 hours ago, Cdog923 said:

 

Let me help you: stop listening to Rush Limbaugh. 

Thanks Cdog...old habits die hard, and he is on our local radio station from 11-2 

Some (Limbaugh) are speculating that Pelosi chose the "impeachment proceedings" angle now on the Ukraine deal, after putting it off for so long even when other seemingly impeachable violations had occurred, because Biden is still polling well, and Warren needed some help to get a boost past him...and there is bound to be some dirty laundry aired on Joe and his son because of this 

1 hour ago, Ulty said:

Safety Owen Fankhauser

 

That douche in Lincoln/Omaha that keeps filing lawsuits over strip clubs and liquor licenses:

Shane Harrington

Thanks for the link Knapp...if Giuliani is the "mastermind" of the entire conspiracy then Trump's side should be very afraid...

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

I'm not sure if you're talking about Biden or Warren, but whatever corruption either is guilty of probably pales in comparison to this. Yeah?

 

If Biden is found to be complicit...as collateral damage...in the Ukraine scandal we could see both the sitting President and the opposition front runner eliminated from the 2020 race 

a "head instead of heart" pick this week...

Huskers 31

Buckeyes 44

Rush 140

Pass 260

10 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

IMO, I think the rule makes perfect sense, and the people on this board are so butt hurt about it because the play happened against Nebraska.  If it were the other way around, the fans would be thinking "what a smart, heads-up play by the Huskers!!!"

maybe I would be the hold out...it is a stupid/nonsensical rule...were the Huskers the beneficiary, I would have gladly accepted the additional yardage and still said "that is one stupid rule..."

14 hours ago, ColoradoHusk said:

The rules of golf and football are completely different.  The rules of golf have no relevancy to this discussion.

 

In football, any player standing out of bounds touching a loose ball makes the ball out of bounds.  It does not matter where the ball's location is.  The ball could be thrown and the ball is 3 feet from being "out of bounds", but if it's touched by a legal player who is out of bounds, the ball is considered out of bounds.  Some of you guys need to read the rule book.  https://cfo.arbitersports.com/Groups/104777/Library/files/2014 Plays inbounds outofbounds.pdf  

No one...literally no one in this thread...is saying they did not follow the rule. Everyone...except you...is saying the rule is stupid 

12 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

There is no such thing as illegal touching if a player is out of bounds when they touch the ball. That just makes the ball out of bounds. Always.

 

 

 

 

I think people are up in arms about this just because they were caught off guard, didn't know it was a rule, and it went against our team. If one of our players did it everyone would likely be having a good old time with it, but reality is, this is and has been a rule for ages.

 

Look at how many NFL examples there are in this video:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, there is no such thing as illegal touching if you're out of bounds. That just makes you and the ball out of bounds. Try to catch the ball as a receiver when you're out of bounds? The ball is out of bounds. Try to recover a fumble on defense when you're out of bounds? The ball is out of bounds. You can call it a 'loophole' I guess but it operates on the same logic on the kickoff as it does in any other scenario where a player is out of bands and touches the ball.

except if you try to catch a pass while out of bounds, the ball is not touching the field...

thanks for your explanation and accompanying video, but I still think the rule makes no sense...it negates a perfectly executed kick

19 hours ago, huskerfan74 said:

All I know that if we play against Ohio State like we did against Illinois, it will get very ugly very early. We need to play four quarters of outstanding football to have a chance against them. Several key players got injured yesterday, let us hope we have everyone healthy because we need all the weapons we can get against Ohio State. 

first half of Colorado game paired with second half of Illinois game....and we have a winna 

 Huskers 41

Illini/(Illinus?)  13

Rush 234

Pass 291

1 hour ago, Frott Scost said:

 

Were not even talking about a VERY small minority wanting to completely take guns away.  We cant even get background checks which 90% of Americans are in favor of for Christ sake. 

there are (in all 50 States) mandatory background checks for every sale through a licensed dealer. those sales currently account for 78% of all firearms sales...

the "universal background check"...which I am in favor of...would apply to gun shows and some private sales

36 minutes ago, Redux said:

...Bringing down the NRA doesn't stop gun violence.

while I don't believe in the unyielding stance of staunch 2A folks pushed by the NRA...I believe Redux is also correct

46 minutes ago, ZRod said:

That's just Moiraine.

My wife's friend was sporting a shirt at the game Saturday night that read:

"...more like Hott Frost..."

(my wife has already ordered one)

everybody already thinks we are hicks...i say embrace it!  Remember:

"Nebraska...It's NOT for everyone" 

I am in Cheeky...you start the movement and the rest will follow 

1 hour ago, zeWilbur said:

Amazingly even better than that.

 

103-8 in the last 8 years(2011-2018)

142-15 back to 2008 (when the Saban dominance began) including the 3 wins this season.

 

 

a juggernaut...i hope we can get back to that level at some point 

they had a segment this weekend about power 5 schools that have never hosted a GameDay. Ames used to be at the top of the list until last weekend...

Syracuse

Minnesota

Maryland

Cal

Wade

Rutgers

Kansas

Virginia

Illinois

2 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I do find it funny that most of us pretend we hate ESPN and College Game Day...but now we would love it to be in Lincoln.  

 

Still the best college football show, hands down.

always my favorite Saturday morning watch...I have not seen any hatred of the program

26 minutes ago, hskrfan4life said:

On my birthday against a top 10 team? LET'S GO!!!

here is hoping you have a reaaalllly happy birthday!

33 minutes ago, knapplc said:

6:30pm Kickoff for this game.

big, big red letter slot for us... fingers crossed

5 minutes ago, CapoValley said:

I’d prefer gameday return to Nebraska when they’re a marquee top ten opponent, and not when they look like a plucky gladiator who may last a little longer against the lions than some. 

 

Let’s wait a year or two. They’ll be back on our terms. 

I am voting with Capo on this one

I am definitely going to try this one...! thanks

19 hours ago, knapplc said:

This is just sad.

 

 

cant event imagine...giving out free tickets just to put butts in the seats  

thought about making the drive to Champain but it just didnt work out...should be a whole lotta red shirts in attendance