Geeto67

Win. Plus you learned the #1 lesson: you have to have money to make money. If you bought $3000 worth of bitcoin at $3 they today they would be worth $38,000. This is why most track investment by a % of rate of change (in this case you saw a 1260% ROI on your original investment - which is bonkers). The more money you have in, the less rate of change you need to make or lose money.

You and I share this sentiment, although 4th in points is nothing to sneeze at. You know who has really let me down this season? Cal Crutchlow. he's never been that strong, but he had the best season of his moto GP career last year and I was hoping he could keep the momentum up.

Marc has an amazing intuitive talent with motorbikes. I actually think Jorge Lorenzo is the better technical rider of the two Spaniards, but Marquez is just pure magic and has a talent for pulling the seemingly impossible off.

SUPERFLY!!!! https://annarbor.craigslist.org/cto/d/1977-caballista-corvette/6320679702.html

Not Patronizing. Your wife is an attorney. One of the more frustrating things about legislation is that there are "regular" definitions and "legal industry" definitions which are not always the same. I am encouraging you to have her help you with this because she has insight you may not have, I'm just saying it in a way that sounds slightly dickish because I assumed everyone on here already knew she is an atty and it didn't need restating. here: https://web.archive.org/web/20170626021434/http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2015/2015-07-21-petition.pdf if it comes up network error, hit the go button at the top of the page as it should have the cite in the txt box. Maybe Influencer isn't the correct term either. I think a better way to look at it is "why is the act appointing an Advocate who is an outsider of the state to look after the interests of the state" when we have an Atty General and state level representative politicians. Well.... Positives: - familiarity with the specific healthcare issue at stake - experience with challenges to the act. - independent of the political process, esp the party process and lobbying. often with these measures the enemies of the bill attack from all sides: Litigation + federal lobbying + state lobbying + public attack at campaigns Negatives: - No check on actions because they are not answerable to the state politicians. - not familiar with how the issue effects ohio at the local community level. So you have a valid concern. Ohio already has an adovcate in it's Atty General and politicans, but those can be influenced by Pharma's spending and it puts the fight on us as citizens to continually fight through vote against the drug company's interests. You aren't really who this bill is aimed at, and consequently you won't feel the effect. The question is, do you know whom this bill is seeking to have the most effect on and do you feel they need a reduction in cost? and slow your roll on "capitalist forces" because the only thing those "capitalist forces" in medicine have done for America is make us the country with the highest drug costs. Personally I don't think profitability has any place in something that is considered a necessary social good because it has a tendency to skew the decision making away from the good of the people it serves and toward the good of the shareholders.

Can you point to the exact language that states this? I don't think this is accurate. here, let me save you some time - here is the exact language of the bill that deals with legal defense: Point to me the sentence or sentences that opens the state up to medical malpractice liability. you can ask your wife for help if you like. The way I read this, in the context of existing laws, is that the state has to fund defense of the measure itself. These are NOT medical malpractice suits but are going to be civil suits brought by big pharma to try and get the courts to declare the measure unconstitutional or invalid. Why do they put measure in? to scare away big pharma. Without it, the Durg industry knows they can just pour buckets of money into suing the state until it threatens the well being of the state budget and then the state government caves. This provision commits the state to having to spend money to defend the measure no matter what which means that the big pharma strategy of trying to outspend the state in the court system won't work. It's a pretty effective deterrent and has been working in california. Basically this is a big nuclear bomb that says to the drug companies "you wanna get crazy, we'll blow this whole motherfucker up so you don't win". From what I am hearing, the pharma industry is spreading a lot of false information around, even in professional circles (e.g like physicians they supply), about how this measure will impact the medical industry. Malpractice suits are not a credible threat from this because price regulation does not legally qualify as a medical decision deviating from the standard of care. There are lots of other lawsuits that could be brought against this measure, most having to do with business regulation, but not ones brought by patients who suffered an adverse medical event because of this bill.

And they get between $1million and $2million per year for the naming rights for "Mapfre Stadium". So just selling the name pays for the land and extras. I believe the Crew also have the concession rights and that may actually be a sore spot for them because without attendance, concession doesn't generate as much revenue (or at all). If they haven't been making money on concessions, then trying to force the city to build the stadium for them makes more sense because the costs would transfer to the City and if it hasn't been making money, then it's one more loss to move off the books.

The answer is yes, no, and maybe. On it's face, and absent any agreements or municipal ownership, yes. The responsibility of the stadium falls on the owners of the team. However, A sports franchise does have some social benefit to a city and state, and many owners often leverage that to get the municipality and sometimes the state to kick in some money. The more entrenched a sports franchise is and the more revenue it generates for the community, the more they can get the local government to kick in. It's not all one sided for the owners however, whomever builds the stadium "owns" it and therefore has a right to concession and parking rights and revenue. Absent that, some teams will sell the naming rights to private companies and have the company finance the stadium in part or whole. That's how you end up with things like "the Prudential Center" or "Citi Field". In stark reality, these stadiums are often structured deals with some combination of all three paying into the costs of construction and operation. For expansion teams, if a city is lobbying really hard, the league may make it a condition of approval that a new stadium is built putting the responsibility of putting the deal together on the City where the team will be located. And all this is before we talk about the land the stadium is built on. Often the land is leased from the city itself. It's rare for an owner to own both the land the stadium it is built on and the stadium itself. An interesting deviation is the Green Bay Packers. They are "owned" by mostly the community that lives in Green Bay through a publicly traded not for profit. Because of the strong community ownership, the local government of Green Bay bore the cost of Lambeau field as well as "City Stadium" before it because the members of the community lobbied and voted for it. My home field in Baseball is another interesting case to look at. As part of the Expansion of the National League and granting NY the Mets a new stadium had to be built. Walter O'Malley (former owner of the Bklyn Dodgers) got into a fight with Robert Moses (NYC's most famous Public Works Commissioner) over who would own the Met's new stadium O'Malley wanted full ownership so he could keep parking and concession, whereas NYC wanted that revenue for itself. In the end O'malley ended up paying out of pocket to build Shea Stadium (named after william shea), but the government punished him by only allowing him to sign a 30 year lease which he would have to renew. Shea Stadium was replaced by Citi Field which was financed by Citibank ($850 million) and the City of NY ($615 million via subsidies and bond sales). Guess who owns the revenue. So....make sense?

this may be a little more than you want to spend on a body and tags but: https://columbus.craigslist.org/cto/d/1979-volvo-262c-bertone-coupe/6348544616.html The bertone coupes are probably the prettiest 200 based volvo's made. The only problem I see is that bertone chopped 10 cm of height out of the roof of the car in making it a coupe. wheelbase is 109 inches which is kind of long too. the closest I have ever seen to any kind of crazy custom with these cars is this one from the UK: http://car-from-uk.com/ebay/carphotos/full/ebay467732.jpg so a tube chassis one with a roll cage would be really unique.

Some of my cars have been called death traps and rolling coffins, but it was always metaphorical: https://cleveland.craigslist.org/ctd/d/1923-barris-custom-ratula-tv/6347764259.html

I was referring to the ad itself...it's isn't all about you...sheesh! Once, it's a typo...more than once..eh, not so much. Also getting the year wrong is sometimes a red flag. Either way, I'm gonna try a new tact....thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk about my mild obsession with weird cars like Studebaker's "sports" car and try and have a conversation (even if you oddly took offense to it for some wild unknown reason).

another offroad musclecar: https://tuscarawas.craigslist.org/cto/d/1965-ford-mustang-4x4/6351242925.html

here's a new one: https://bloomington.craigslist.org/cto/d/pontiac-grand-prix-2004/6343192266.html the car's nothing special but the ad made me giggle a little:

I routinely see that silver one, and a red 4 door as well in the kingsdale shopping center in UA. Always in front of the same shop too. They only made 90 of the 4 door models in 1989 (20% of production) and they were built in Youngstown Ohio. They are technically Avant III's because of the redesign of the bumpers and headlights, even though they dropped the roman numerals and were just known as "Avanti" (both make and model). By that time the production was under it's 4th owner, John Carfaro, who had trouble selling the now "updated" coupe and convertible and thought a 4 door would make the car more practical as a family car. They are built on a new Caprice Chassis that was supplied by GM sans body. Funny Personal Story: My father has always been obsessed with the Avanti, but has never owned one. He had an R2 hawk in the 60's that he robbed the paxton supercharger from (the supercharger belt hangs on my wall in my garage and says "Studebaker" on it) and gets excited to talk about any of the Lowey studes. In 1990 he wrote to Carfaro for all the material on the car he could get, and walked through the process on ordering one, but he wanted to drive one first. So, on a spring weekend day in 1990, we met a guy at brookhaven airport who had just taken delivery of an automatic convertible and the whole family went for a ride. The car was a 305ci automatic red vert with tan top and interior and my father hated it. I loved the convertible (dad wanted a stick coupe) but hated the "modernized" interior. He ended up not wanting it anymore, and I went away to camp. When I came home he had bought a brand new C4 Zr1. When we were selling our ancestrial home in Flushing a couple of years ago I found all those brochures in the garage for the avanti, and dad couldn't put them in the dumpster fast enough. funny, he still loves the 1962-63 models, and even the later Avanti II's with the 327 chevys and the muncie 4 speeds, but every square headlight late 80's one to him is a piece of shit. BTW, the final version of the avanti did redeem itself: the car used a stude chassis from 1963-1985, then a G body monte carlo chassis from 85-89, then a caprice chassis from 89 to 96, then a firebird F body chassis from 96 -2002, and an SN95 mustang chassis from 2004-2006. The Thrill of an avanti was that it was a 4 seat corvette (the body is fiberglass) which is something it lost in the 80's, but managed to get some performance back for a final push at the end.

how hard it is to spell "Avanti"? jeez. Also seems strange that it's a "1964" since production ended 1963. The tooling and bodies were sold to a pair of Indiana dealers and production resumed in 1965 after studebaker shut down, so of all the years outside the original production run there could have been an avanti, 1964 was not one of them. because it has a 289, and I assume it's a stude engine it's probably a 1963 unit that's mislabeled, since the 1965-85 "Avanti IIs" had 327s, 350s, and 400ci small block chevys. fun local fact the fiberglass bodies were made in Ashtabula, Ohio.

https://detroit.craigslist.org/mcb/cto/d/small-block-chevy-powered-67/6323937774.html the original 2CV, or deux chevaux was known for having two taxable hp (even though it had between 9 and 29hp), this has considerably more.

you do understand that when they say "Taxpayer money" they mean state, city, and local taxes right? Nobody is talking about federal tax money in this situation. what does 98.5% of the people in this country knowing about the crew have to do with the State of Ohio and the city of Columbus spending it's tax revenue on the stadium?

lolwut? really? don't you own a stealth R/T and a 455cu pontiac?

if it is for a 2002 then it will fit any M10 engine including the 1977-1983 320i with the M10. Is it a KKK brand turbo? if so that would make it a stock setup off a 2002TII. Calloway used to make turbo kits for the 2002 and 320i in the early 1980's and I think he used RayJay turbos. Are you giving it away? if so I'll take it as part of my future 320i project parts horde. If not what are you asking for it?

well you aren't kidding about them being cheap: https://louisville.craigslist.org/cto/d/2003-nissan-sentra-se-spec/6310339094.html but curious, what makes them complicated and expensive to work on more than say a comparable year honda civic?

I owned a 1976 2002 years ago. I think I might still have a service manual for it if I dig around in some of the boxes in my basement. I've seen more than one parked in Tom Hatem's shop on 5th avenue.

part of this conversation was about "too early" to start looking at early 2000's cars as future classics. Well by the time the economy really recovers, those who were building candy painted b18 powered hondas in 2002 would be looking at these cars with nostalgia. I am thinking 2020. But it has to be the right car. Evos, S2000s, WRXs, supras, etc...those will always have a following, and hondas/acuras will probably see the biggest price jump for well done cars because of how iconic they are and how butchered most are. So what other cars will be of interest and why? here is what I think: F&F Cars that may become more popular in the coming years(re expensive): - miatas - Celicas - Maximas - DSMs - VW GTI MKIV and V - Scion TC Cars I don't think will move the needle: - Sentras - anything mazda that is not a speed 3 or a miata - 350z (only because the people who buy these tend to keep buying the newer versions of the chassis).

A lot of the culture has changed as a result of the financial crisis. Pre-2008 there was a lot of disposable income for toys and such so there were a lot more people with toy cars and bikes, and spending for the expensive stuff like flashy paint and lambo doors. Post 2008 a lot of the focus shifted to doing great things for very little money which changed the tastes. None of this stuff went away, just lots of people exited the hobby because they didn't have the money to keep up, and others shifted their goals to fit their budget. People never stopped building tuner cars, customs, hot rods, etc...but the tight wallets meant people had to pick and choose. Plus tech improved too so instead of expensive "neon" systems that are kinda difficult to install, you have LED's now that are easy, half the size, and cheap. Paint is always gonna be expensive because it is labor intensive and requires a lot of specialized equipment, but now we have wraps, hydrographics, plasti-dip - more options for less $$$. Pre-2008 I would have paid someone $1500 to heavy flake my sportster, but this year, I hydrodipped it in a garbage can for less than $100 and got a great result, lots of people are doing stuff like that now because there are more tutorials, more information, and more encouragement than there was before.

wow

everything on that car looks great except the fender vents. then again...