Jump to content

huskerhill

Members
  • Content Count

    1,288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

212 Excellent

About huskerhill

  • Rank
    All Conference
  • Birthday 09/02/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Omaha
  1. I've seen others state the same. They must have changed it
  2. huskerhill

    RB Jamari Peacock [Virginia - Signed LOI]

    Maybe a plan B in case Miles goes elsewhere
  3. huskerhill

    WR Jamire Calvin [Washington State - Signed LOI]

    I hope we're not slow playing this kid...
  4. Blitz, when can I expect an update on the class of '14?

    1. JJ Husker

      JJ Husker

      I think he's working on it as we speak. I feel 60+ recruit updates are in our near future. Then on to 2013....

    2. huskerhill

      huskerhill

      insert bart scott "can't wait" gif

  5. huskerhill

    DE Grayson Boomer [Oklahoma State - Signed LOI]

    We sure this isn't for Isaiah Thomas?
  6. huskerhill

    *** 2017 Recruiting ***

    Assuming his parents are husker fans? LolI can't remember the details. We talked about it a bit in some thread somewhere. I believe his dad played a year at Nebraska. Yes, big fans.Then wtf are we dragging our feet for? That's the kind of passionate player we need. And if TCU is interested, I trust he is legit. Its obvious he's not that high on the coaches board. Why offer a plan d when you could get him In January if you need to?
  7. huskerhill

    HuskerBoard Recruiting Predictor 2017

    What a bunch of jabronies
  8. huskerhill

    SIGNED - DT Deontre Thomas

    Woah, woah, woah. You better watch out. Some may mistake that realistic look at things for negativity. Get over it What's the F gif from?
  9. huskerhill

    SIGNED - DT Deontre Thomas

    Woah, woah, woah. You better watch out. Some may mistake that realistic look at things for negativity. Get over it
  10. huskerhill

    RB Kylin Hill [Mississippi State - Signed LOI]

    He claims Nebraska is in the lead.
  11. huskerhill

    Guaranteed/Basic Income

    whether you structure it as a negative income tax or a basic income, in principle it's essentially the same thing, and Friendman discusses as much. It's just a small variant in how you calculate it. But whether you write someone a check, give them a subsidy, or give them a tax break, that is a form of income from the government. Giving everyone $20k just for being an American is not the same thing described by Freidman in that video.
  12. huskerhill

    Guaranteed/Basic Income

    Correct, it would require political will. Maybe we don't have it. It would have to be coupled with holistic reforms of the tax system and the type/quality of people we attract to government. Here's an interesting thought experiment: Imagine a world that is completely automated, so that we can put production of goods and services on "cruise control" thereby retaining our GDP growth rate, but reducing the need for people to work. In such a world, should we encourage people to stop working by simply cutting everyone a check and enjoy allow people to pursue less profitable, but potentially important pursuits, or even just increase their leisure time? Would such a situation be different than an extension of the per/hour productivity improvements we've seen which have driven down the costs of goods and afforded people the ability to work only 40 hours a week? Why keep people shackled to labor if we don't need to through automation or other efficiencies? To be honest, that sounds horrible... But think of the time we could spend following the Huskers!! You had me at husk.... You had me at husk...
  13. huskerhill

    Guaranteed/Basic Income

    Correct, it would require political will. Maybe we don't have it. It would have to be coupled with holistic reforms of the tax system and the type/quality of people we attract to government. Here's an interesting thought experiment: Imagine a world that is completely automated, so that we can put production of goods and services on "cruise control" thereby retaining our GDP growth rate, but reducing the need for people to work. In such a world, should we encourage people to stop working by simply cutting everyone a check and enjoy allow people to pursue less profitable, but potentially important pursuits, or even just increase their leisure time? Would such a situation be different than an extension of the per/hour productivity improvements we've seen which have driven down the costs of goods and afforded people the ability to work only 40 hours a week? Why keep people shackled to labor if we don't need to through automation or other efficiencies? To be honest, that sounds horrible...
×