Agree or Disagree?

[GulfCoastDawg]

Be it an extreme troll attempt or not do you agree or disagree with Coulter's column?

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/opinion/columnists/2014/06/25/coulter-growing-interest-soccer-sign-nations-moral-decay/11372137/

[Goat Holder]

I HATE soccer but I see this as a troll attempt, an attempt to rally the conservatives. I am a conservative myself, and I see this as a reach.

[DudyDawg]

Completely ridiculous. I read the first two paragraphs and know that. How can moral decay be tied to a sport?

And it's clear she doesn't know what she's talking about when she said there's no individual achievement. Considering Cristiano Ronaldo was just ranked as one of the top marketable athletes in the world.

[Pioneer Dawg]

She's hitting her targeted audience.

Its a cool thing to say "soccer you just run around and never actually feel failure" but watch ANY youth sport.

Flag football- sorry kids play the line and waddle around with their hands behind their backs

Baseball- sorry kids are stuck in RF and are subbed out every other time through the order.

Basketball- sorry kids play the required 2 quarters, get matched up with the other sorry kids on defense, and never see the ball come near them on offense OR defense. Also you can "score out" which lets the sorry kids REALLY KNOW how much they suck because you have to handcuff the talent.

Yea soccer at youth ages is running around and not "experiencing failure" but so are every other sport. By the time you reach the age where failure actually can and does get experienced in soccer it's the same age for the other sports too.


As to other points. I don't think soccer is being "force fed" to anyone. It's not being shown while other more popular sports are blacked out or anything. Espn is making a killing on the World Cup. Can the same be said about their WNBA coverage?

[Pioneer Dawg]

I see this as a troll attempt, an attempt to rally the conservatives. I am a conservative myself, and I see this as a reach.

Same here.

[Political Hack]

sports is what unites this country. There's no larger sense of the word "community" than what sports provides.

first large volunteer gathering of people after 9/11 when people were worried about follow on attacks? SC vs State on a Thursday night. 55,000 people came together, waived American flags and cheered for their local team. To suggest sports is anything but good for our nation is absurd. It's damn near the only industry left that's recession proof.

[MadDawg]

Be it an extreme troll attempt or not do you agree or disagree with Coulter's column?

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/opinion/columnists/2014/06/25/coulter-growing-interest-soccer-sign-nations-moral-decay/11372137/

She never fails to make me embarrassed to be a conservative.

[FISHDAWG]

She never fails to make me embarrassed to be a conservative.

+ 1

[Goat Holder]

sports is what unites this country. There's no larger sense of the word "community" than what sports provides.

first large volunteer gathering of people after 9/11 when people were worried about follow on attacks? SC vs State on a Thursday night. 55,000 people came together, waived American flags and cheered for their local team. To suggest sports is anything but good for our nation is absurd. It's damn near the only industry left that's recession proof.

Hack, you make good points here. Something I often wonder about is the bolded part - is sports good for our economy? I guess it is, if other countries are paying to see our sports. But I see sports as paid for by the middle class. Basically shifting wealth. That's why I will not go to bowl games and pad some rich guy's pocket. BUT.....if you believe that new enterprises are CREATING wealth, then it changes the dynamic. I guess I just see drilling for oil/natural gas as better than I do the Super Bowl, economically.

[HancockCountyDog]

Good lord she is a moron.

She actually argued about the length of a soccer game? I guess she prefers the 4 hour games of baseball as opposed to the 2 hour games of soccer.

When I read stuff like this, I genuinely think she has lost it. Not just a little bit either - Im talking she has ceased being able to hold a coherent thought.

[BeardoMSU]

Good lord she is a moron.



This pretty much sums her up. Nothing else is needed.

[Pioneer Dawg]

is sports good for our economy?

This is a wrongheaded question. It's not anymore "good" or "bad" for the economy than anything else. Sports is PART OF our economy.

[DudyDawg]

Hack, you make good points here. Something I often wonder about is the bolded part - is sports good for our economy? I guess it is, if other countries are paying to see our sports. But I see sports as paid for by the middle class. Basically shifting wealth. That's why I will not go to bowl games and pad some rich guy's pocket. BUT.....if you believe that new enterprises are CREATING wealth, then it changes the dynamic. I guess I just see drilling for oil/natural gas as better than I do the Super Bowl, economically.

I wouldn't say that the actual sports themselves help the economy, but i think helps in the sense that people who go to a game also spend money at businesses around the area, so yes, it would pad a rich man's pocket, but will also help the working man's. If that makes sense

[TheRef]

I wouldn't say that the actual sports themselves help the economy, but i think helps in the sense that people who go to a game also spend money at businesses around the area, so yes, it would pad a rich man's pocket, but will also help the working man's. If that makes sense

Here's the thing. Bars everywhere that are showing the World Cup matches are getting a fairly large surge of revenue at a normally quiet time when they're either desperate for visits or even just closed because there's no demand.

Yesterday, I know that there were bars that weren't normally open at 11:00 AM that opened between 10 AM and 10:30 AM just to be ready for the people who wanted to watch it. This World Cup can do nothing but stimulate the local economy of bars who decided to take advantage of the situation and open up for the matches. Just my $0.02

[starkvegasdawg]

Of course she was writing this just to get a response. Now, I am sure sure does not like soccer and that was the cause of her writing the article but I have no doubts she threw in some of those excessively inflammaotry analogies just to get under the skin of the avid soccer fans.

[Political Hack]

This is a wrongheaded question. It's not anymore "good" or "bad" for the economy than anything else. Sports is PART OF our economy.

barring a bubble burst, isn't being "part" of the economy inherently good for the economy? Isn't that what far right conservatives argue for? "More economy" is good for the economy? Build, build, build, bigger, bigger, bugger, jobs, jobs, jobs... etc?

[Political Hack]

Here's the thing. Bars everywhere that are showing the World Cup matches are getting a fairly large surge of revenue at a normally quiet time when they're either desperate for visits or even just closed because there's no demand.

Yesterday, I know that there were bars that weren't normally open at 11:00 AM that opened between 10 AM and 10:30 AM just to be ready for the people who wanted to watch it. This World Cup can do nothing but stimulate the local economy of bars who decided to take advantage of the situation and open up for the matches. Just my $0.02

correct. it's the reverberating effect. If you don't think Starkville's economy is impacted by MSU sports you're wrong. Restaurants, bars, liquor stores, gas stations, hotels, grocery stores, Wal mart, etc...

[Saltydog]

"If Michael Jackson had treated his chronic insomnia with a tape of Argentina vs. Brazil instead of Propofol, he'd still be alive, although bored."

[PassInterference]

It was satire, folks. Have a beer. Relax.

See...that Michael Jackson comment was funny I don't care who you are.

[Offshore Dawg]

I like any Bitch that sticks it to that liberal ass

This soccer rant is for selling books, many in the USA do like soccer and were born here, but not me. Give me real FOOTBALL

[K9 Avenger]

LOVE Chairman Ann

[Johnson85]

I HATE soccer but I see this as a troll attempt, an attempt to rally the conservatives. I am a conservative myself, and I see this as a reach.

It was not an attempt to rally conservatives. It was a half-assed attempt at humor. When people act like it was serious, she will make fun of them for being thin-skinned and too stupid to recognize satire.

[Goat Holder]

barring a bubble burst, isn't being "part" of the economy inherently good for the economy? Isn't that what far right conservatives argue for? "More economy" is good for the economy? Build, build, build, bigger, bigger, bugger, jobs, jobs, jobs... etc?

Depends on what part you're talking about. There are parts of the economy that create, and other parts that are service/entertainment oriented. I see sports as the latter. It's not "creating" wealth for the U.S. unless we are exporting the product. Do other countries watch U.S. sports in the mainstream? I don't know. Right now I see all the money generated by TV deals, conferences, and stadiums as coming from the middle class. Yes, it comes from rich folks too, but the elites are the ones smart enough to make money off the top....on the backs of the middle class.

Tell me why I'm wrong.

[Goat Holder]

Here's the thing. Bars everywhere that are showing the World Cup matches are getting a fairly large surge of revenue at a normally quiet time when they're either desperate for visits or even just closed because there's no demand.

Yesterday, I know that there were bars that weren't normally open at 11:00 AM that opened between 10 AM and 10:30 AM just to be ready for the people who wanted to watch it. This World Cup can do nothing but stimulate the local economy of bars who decided to take advantage of the situation and open up for the matches. Just my $0.02

Again, all SERVICE oriented. No new wealth or economy is being created. And that's tunnel thinking to look at just one place. I thought we were talking about the U.S. as a whole.

[TheRef]

Again, all SERVICE oriented. No new wealth or economy is being created. And that's tunnel thinking to look at just one place. I thought we were talking about the U.S. as a whole.

Woah, woah, woah. I'm just presenting what I've seen in my personal experience. Now. You have your right to disagree with what I've presented and I'm not going to argue with you about that.

One question: What do you mean by saying that it's tunnel thinking to look at just one place? I'm not trying to troll you or rile you up. I'm genuinely wondering what you meant by that, Goat. I'll hang up and listen.

[Johnson85]

barring a bubble burst, isn't being "part" of the economy inherently good for the economy? Isn't that what far right conservatives argue for? "More economy" is good for the economy? Build, build, build, bigger, bigger, bugger, jobs, jobs, jobs... etc?

Eh, gov't spending is part of the economy and it's often destructive of wealth. Sports are entertainment. It's something we get to indulge in because we are productive enough in other places that we don't have to spend all our resources on necessities. Sports can be good for a local economy. Starkville definitely benefits from MSU sports. Towns with soccer and baseball or other tournaments that bring in outside money can be good for it. But sports are not good or bad for the economy as a whole unless you are a GDP fetishist.

[Goat Holder]

Woah, woah, woah. I'm just presenting what I've seen in my personal experience. Now. You have your right to disagree with what I've presented and I'm not going to argue with you about that.

One question: What do you mean by saying that it's tunnel thinking to look at just one place? I'm not trying to troll you or rile you up. I'm genuinely wondering what you meant by that, Goat. I'll hang up and listen.

Macroeconomics. This guy explained it better than I did: http://www.elitedawgs.com/showthread.php?17383-Agree-or-Disagree&p=203591#post203591

[TheRef]

Macroeconomics. This guy explained it better than I did: http://www.elitedawgs.com/showthread.php?17383-Agree-or-Disagree&p=203591#post203591

Fair enough.

[hacker]

I like any Bitch that sticks it to that liberal ass

you seem cool

[Johnson85]

Again, all SERVICE oriented. No new wealth or economy is being created. And that's tunnel thinking to look at just one place. I thought we were talking about the U.S. as a whole.

Depends on what you mean by 'wealth.' Service creates a consumer surplus. If I go to a restaurant or bar, pretty much by definition I am handing over money in exchange for something I think is more valuable and they are handing over stuff that they view as less valuable than my money. I guess it's true that there is no capital formation and it's strictly consumption and I get your point that it is not something that is growing the overall pie, but I think it is an overstatement to say it doesn't create wealth.

[Political Hack]

Again, all SERVICE oriented. No new wealth or economy is being created. And that's tunnel thinking to look at just one place. I thought we were talking about the U.S. as a whole.

this is an individualistic way of thinking. Service doesn't allow the individual to acquire anything with their money other than experience. They buy something without adding to their net wealth. I get that, but you're ignoring the back end of the transaction. The business owner receives revenue in which they can reinvest in their business, use for personal use, or raise wages for their employees. So, the service industry does accomplish a few things... at least on the backend. In addition, it creates economic churn and generates sale tax revenues for local governments to build roads, bridges, parks, schools, emergency services, etc... all of which are critical to ensuring the continued success of the local economy, both the service industry and from a goods production standpoint.

[Political Hack]

Eh, gov't spending is part of the economy and it's often destructive of wealth. Sports are entertainment. It's something we get to indulge in because we are productive enough in other places that we don't have to spend all our resources on necessities. Sports can be good for a local economy. Starkville definitely benefits from MSU sports. Towns with soccer and baseball or other tournaments that bring in outside money can be good for it. But sports are not good or bad for the economy as a whole unless you are a GDP fetishist.

a lot of mom and pop business owners would strongly disagree. And as muh as far right wing conservatives would love to see this nation be dominated by billion dollar corporations, it's the small businesses that make the Anerican economy what it is. without the thousands of small towns across America contributing to the economic engine, Wall Street simply does not exist.

[ckDOG]

It's not satire bc she's not actually poking fun at the people that actually believe that crap. This is trolling - being a dick to create a response.

[ckDOG]

Depends on what part you're talking about. There are parts of the economy that create, and other parts that are service/entertainment oriented. I see sports as the latter. It's not "creating" wealth for the U.S. unless we are exporting the product. Do other countries watch U.S. sports in the mainstream? I don't know. Right now I see all the money generated by TV deals, conferences, and stadiums as coming from the middle class. Yes, it comes from rich folks too, but the elites are the ones smart enough to make money off the top....on the backs of the middle class.

Tell me why I'm wrong.

How are you defining wealth and why does it have to be tied in to exports?

[Goat Holder]

you seem cool

Why? Because he disagrees with liberals?

I've never understood that. If a liberal disagrees with a conservative, they just disagree. Or compromise. If a conservative disagrees with a liberal, they get butthurt, resort to insults and similar. Just like you did.

Why is that? I'm not talking about which group is right or wrong.....I just want to know why liberals can't handle someone disagreeing with them.

[scottycameron]

I thought it was pretty funny. Not great but not bad. As usual y'all libs need to lighten up. Why is everything always a big deal?

[Pioneer Dawg]

And as muh as far right wing conservatives would love to see this nation be dominated by billion dollar corporations, it's the small businesses that make the Anerican economy what it is.

And you still live in the cliche dominated unthinking meme world. Idiot.

[TheRef]

And you still live in the cliche dominated unthinking meme world. Idiot.

Hey now...I like those memes.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/500x/51702148.jpg

[Pioneer Dawg]

Hey now...I like those memes.



Wrong definition of meme. Hack's thinking is the media generated, unthinking, "conventional wisdom"

Democrats - for the little guy, civil liberties, against big business
Republicans - for the rich, Patriot Act, wants to go to war all the time

Hack doesn't understand reality

[TheRef]

Wrong definition of meme. Hack's thinking is the media generated, unthinking, "conventional wisdom"

Democrats - for the little guy, civil liberties, against big business
Republicans - for the rich, Patriot Act, wants to go to war all the time

Hack doesn't understand reality

Ah okay....just looked it up.

[Johnson85]

a lot of mom and pop business owners would strongly disagree. And as muh as far right wing conservatives would love to see this nation be dominated by billion dollar corporations, it's the small businesses that make the Anerican economy what it is. without the thousands of small towns across America contributing to the economic engine, Wall Street simply does not exist.

Why would mom and pop owners disagree? The fact that we spend entertainment dollars on sports doesn't really have anything in particular to do with mom and pop business owners. You could take all the money we spend on sports and spend it on music and it'd look the same. You'd have a lot of money spent on live events, a lot of money spent watching broadcast events, associated apparel industries, more money spent on local music venues instead of local sports venues, etc. Doesn't have anything to do with mom and pop owners other than the types of business would be slightly different. I'm all for sports and am all for people spending money on what makes them happy, but if sports didn't exist, we'd find a way to spend that money and likely would for the most part spend it on other entertainment or leisure that we see as a substitute, although I guess much of it could be invested also, in which case I guess you could argue sports are bad if you think the only goal is increasing the size of the pie (in which case lots of stuff is bad).

[Political Hack]

Q: who owns the restaurants, shops, gas stations, bars, etc... that are frequented during and around sporting events?
A: Mom and Pops

100,000 folks don't show up for just any 3 hour event. Sports is unique to the economy and is rampant within the economy. It's a redonkulous surge of economic churn. without it, Cable TV would die. Everyone would be just using hulu and Netflix. Live sports has kept that entire industry afloat. The reverberating economic impact of sports can't be defined because it's too large. It's a MASSIVE part of our economic engine, service industry and otherwise.

[Goat Holder]

100,000 folks don't show up for just any 3 hour event. Sports is unique to the economy and is rampant within the economy. It's a redonkulous surge of economic churn. without it, Cable TV would die. Everyone would be just using hulu and Netflix. Live sports has kept that entire industry afloat. The reverberating economic impact of sports can't be defined because it's too large. It's a MASSIVE part of our economic engine, service industry and otherwise.

So thus far, I've seen two answers (Trust me, I'm educating myself, not trying to argue, remember that I asked the question, and it was because I didn't know):

- Sports is good for the U.S. economy as a whole due to economic churn, which somehow creates more
- Sports, outside of creating for local areas and mom/pops, sports does not significantly CREATE more wealth for the U.S. unless it's sold to other countries.

Sounds like we need to be marketing to China, they have all the money.

[Johnson85]

Q: who owns the restaurants, shops, gas stations, bars, etc... that are frequented during and around sporting events?
A: Mom and Pops

100,000 folks don't show up for just any 3 hour event. Sports is unique to the economy and is rampant within the economy. It's a redonkulous surge of economic churn. without it, Cable TV would die. Everyone would be just using hulu and Netflix. Live sports has kept that entire industry afloat. The reverberating economic impact of sports can't be defined because it's too large. It's a MASSIVE part of our economic engine, service industry and otherwise.

I still don't think see why that would make mom and pops disagree with my statement unless you're saying their self interest makes them incapable of being rational. I don't think they'd even particularly care where we spend entertainment dollars other than the fact that they are set up in response to our current spending patterns. If people stopped spending on sports, their desire to consume wouldn't go away. Maybe they'd drive nicer cars, maybe they'd spend more money on landscaping or home improvement, maybe they'd eat out more etc. There's no obvious reason that whatever spending pattern emerged would favor big corporations over mom and pops.

In your one example, if cable tv were not propped up by sports, that might spread more money to small operations, as content production would not be as concentrated, at least for a time while the market evolves, and content production is ultimately where the money is anyway outside of owning the pipes of distribution.

[ckDOG]

So thus far, I've seen two answers (Trust me, I'm educating myself, not trying to argue, remember that I asked the question, and it was because I didn't know):

- Sports is good for the U.S. economy as a whole due to economic churn, which somehow creates more
- Sports, outside of creating for local areas and mom/pops, sports does not significantly CREATE more wealth for the U.S. unless it's sold to other countries.

Sounds like we need to be marketing to China, they have all the money.

Again, what does it matter if it's China buying or Americans? Regardless if the demand is for tangible assets like baseball bats or if it's for intangible assets like broadcasting services to watch people use baseball bats, somebody is going to build the infrastructure and workforce to make those sales happen. The source of the demand is not relevant. If you make a good bat or put on a good TV production, somebody will demand it and pay you a margin for you to give it to them.

[Political Hack]

I still don't think see why that would make mom and pops disagree with my statement unless you're saying their self interest makes them incapable of being rational. I don't think they'd even particularly care where we spend entertainment dollars other than the fact that they are set up in response to our current spending patterns. If people stopped spending on sports, their desire to consume wouldn't go away. Maybe they'd drive nicer cars, maybe they'd spend more money on landscaping or home improvement, maybe they'd eat out more etc. There's no obvious reason that whatever spending pattern emerged would favor big corporations over mom and pops.

In your one example, if cable tv were not propped up by sports, that might spread more money to small operations, as content production would not be as concentrated, at least for a time while the market evolves, and content production is ultimately where the money is anyway outside of owning the pipes of distribution.

of course it's their own self interests. They're also the backbone of this country... and this economy... not suits on Wall Street.

As far the TV goes, local TV is dead. Concentrated production that appeals to the masses is where it's at. there's not really much small business production on TV anymore. TV as we know it is dying regardless. Everything will be internet driven soon and "TV" will be streamed online or through small portable satellites. AT&T taking over Direct TV and expanding U-Verse is a game changer.

[PassInterference]

Proof positive of sports economic impact are the astronomical figured being paid for TV contracts. College football, NFL, NBA, even MLB. There is big time money in TV because there is big time money in advertising. There is big time money in advertising because there is big time economic activity surrounding the sports.

[Goat Holder]

Again, what does it matter if it's China buying or Americans? Regardless if the demand is for tangible assets like baseball bats or if it's for intangible assets like broadcasting services to watch people use baseball bats, somebody is going to build the infrastructure and workforce to make those sales happen. The source of the demand is not relevant. If you make a good bat or put on a good TV production, somebody will demand it and pay you a margin for you to give it to them.

It goes back to whether or not you believe wealth is finite or infinite. Somewhere, somehow, somebody has to HAVE or CREATE something that turns into money....such as gas, oil, gold, land, whatever. Then the money can be spent a million different ways.

Those people that pay the margin have to get their money somewhere.

[Goat Holder]

of course it's their own self interests. They're also the backbone of this country... and this economy... not suits on Wall Street.

As far the TV goes, local TV is dead. Concentrated production that appeals to the masses is where it's at. there's not really much small business production on TV anymore. TV as we know it is dying regardless. Everything will be internet driven soon and "TV" will be streamed online or through small portable satellites. AT&T taking over Direct TV and expanding U-Verse is a game changer.

Wow, I can't believe you got that out of what he posted.

You do get that the mom/pops can evolve and sell anything they want, to whoever they want, right? So that point is useless. The TV market can do the same. You do realize that the same people that were making money off local TV will now be somehow evolved into the concentrated market right? If they aren't, they were stupid and deserve to go out of business.

[Goat Holder]

Proof positive of sports economic impact are the astronomical figured being paid for TV contracts. College football, NFL, NBA, even MLB. There is big time money in TV because there is big time money in advertising. There is big time money in advertising because there is big time economic activity surrounding the sports.

No offense....but we got that already. I figured that was obvious.

But all that 'big time money' has to come from somewhere. That's my point. Sports aren't creating wealth, they are simply generating it from the working public's entertainment budgets. It's good for 'churn' but that's about it.

[BoomBoom]

So thus far, I've seen two answers (Trust me, I'm educating myself, not trying to argue, remember that I asked the question, and it was because I didn't know):

- Sports is good for the U.S. economy as a whole due to economic churn, which somehow creates more
- Sports, outside of creating for local areas and mom/pops, sports does not significantly CREATE more wealth for the U.S. unless it's sold to other countries.

Sounds like we need to be marketing to China, they have all the money.

American sports (or a fraction of it) are an export for the American economy. Exports are good for the economy. Though any particular export, including our sports, is pretty negligible when compared to the overall economy. Though you start adding up exports and they start to become pretty damn important to the economy.

physical fitness also has its benefits (healthier populace etc), and 'sports' traditionally prepare youths for military service.

[Political Hack]

Wow, I can't believe you got that out of what he posted.

You do get that the mom/pops can evolve and sell anything they want, to whoever they want, right? So that point is useless. The TV market can do the same. You do realize that the same people that were making money off local TV will now be somehow evolved into the concentrated market right? If they aren't, they were stupid and deserve to go out of business.

I got what out of what? What did I take from his post that shouldn't have been taken? Expansion of thoughts bother you?

[Goat Holder]

I got what out of what? What did I take from his post that shouldn't have been taken? Expansion of thoughts bother you?

I apologize for the insulting slant.....it's just that the conversation was going somewhere and you took it backwards. Just a pet peeve of mine.

[Political Hack]

It goes back to whether or not you believe wealth is finite or infinite. Somewhere, somehow, somebody has to HAVE or CREATE something that turns into money....such as gas, oil, gold, land, whatever. Then the money can be spent a million different ways.

Those people that pay the margin have to get their money somewhere.

you think Vanderbilt, Ford, and Rockefeller are the only contributors to the US economy? that's the K street mentality that led to the banking collapse, the concentration if wealth that led to the Great Depression, and will be the death of this country if people don't understand and protect small business across this country.

If you want to be a billionaire, you'd better create something ingenious... but you can also provide a service and still make a lot of money and contribute to the US economy. To suggest otherwise is absurd.

[Political Hack]

I apologize for the insulting slant.....it's just that the conversation was going somewhere and you took it backwards. Just a pet peeve of mine.

I did. I just don't think television would ever "backfill" will new small business given where it is currently.

[ckDOG]

Agree. My opinion is that it is finite and wealth is just a battle for who can be most efficient and win at controlling the existing stuff. It's a formula that should always balance. For every winner there is a loser. Now in that battle of efficiency, the human race has made substantial perceived quality of life improvements, but I don't necessarily tie that into the wealth definition. Regardless of how well or poorly we've managed to use what's on earth for our own benefit, it's always going to be a battle of who can control what exists relative to others living at the same time as you. I guess at the point it gets philosophical.

[Political Hack]

Agree. My opinion is that it is finite and wealth is just a battle for who can be most efficient and win at controlling the existing stuff. It's a formula that should always balance. For every winner there is a loser. Now in that battle of efficiency, the human race has made substantial perceived quality of life improvements, but I don't necessarily tie that into the wealth definition. Regardless of how well or poorly we've managed to use what's on earth for our own benefit, it's always going to be a battle of who can control what exists relative to others living at the same time as you. I guess at the point it gets philosophical.

yep. I want to have more than you and I don't even know how much you have.

[PassInterference]

Sports aren't creating wealth, they are simply generating it ......


Ok.

[Bothrops]

I've heard that she's a crazy sexaholic, fwiw.

[Political Hack]

I've heard that she's a crazy sexaholic, fwiw.

thread hijack.

[dawgs]

Be it an extreme troll attempt or not do you agree or disagree with Coulter's column?

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/opinion/columnists/2014/06/25/coulter-growing-interest-soccer-sign-nations-moral-decay/11372137/

Dumbasses are gonna be dumbasses.

I'm also 90% sure the road signs she saw were referencing hockey, not soccer being she was in SoCal (the kings won the cup) and they were saying "period" not "half" (period is a distinct hockey term).

[bgdog]

Is the agree or disagree whether or not I believe increase in soccer fandom is leading to the moral decay of America?

uhhhh I'm going to go with disagree, but then again I'm capable of critical thinking. So what do I know?

[TaleofTwoDogs]

It was satire, folks. Have a beer. Relax.

article. She is pushing people's buttons on immigration, globalization and its impact on the classical vision of the American way and sports.

Relax, there is no black helicopter here.

[dawgs]

Why? Because he disagrees with liberals?

I've never understood that. If a liberal disagrees with a conservative, they just disagree. Or compromise. If a conservative disagrees with a liberal, they get butthurt, resort to insults and similar. Just like you did.

Why is that? I'm not talking about which group is right or wrong.....I just want to know why liberals can't handle someone disagreeing with them.

I find that response to be the opposite.

[dawgs]

So thus far, I've seen two answers (Trust me, I'm educating myself, not trying to argue, remember that I asked the question, and it was because I didn't know):

- Sports is good for the U.S. economy as a whole due to economic churn, which somehow creates more
- Sports, outside of creating for local areas and mom/pops, sports does not significantly CREATE more wealth for the U.S. unless it's sold to other countries.

Sounds like we need to be marketing to China, they have all the money.

Well there's a reason pro sports have been playing games in Asia, London, Australia, Mexico, etc. they are building followers outside the us.

[Pioneer Dawg]

I find that response to be the opposite.

Just like QKing gets the not evil, just wrong quote backwards