TPS

Hey, I'm on the "they can run the table" bandwagon. This team is ready to make the turn.

Apparently they've felt the public's reaction... http://buffalorising.com/2013/11/uniland-modifying-250-delaware-avenue-project/

Any subsidy they get means taxpayers share that burden. It's an F-ed up system that allows corps to play communities off each other at the expense of the taxpayers.

By the way, there is a thread on him when he was signed, and someone posted a Youtube link with his U of Regina highlights. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/163208-bills-sign-another-to-the-53-man-roster/page__hl__%2Bstefan+%2Bcharles

One of the things I read about him was that he was projected to go #1 or 2. I suspect some teams didn't want to take a chance on him because of his ambitions for the NFL.

After reading Buscaglia's evaluation of the KC game and his comments on Charles, I took some time look into who he is; I guess the B-news did also. Interesting prospect. Huge arms and legs.

I think the easy prediction is whoever wins the TO battle wins the game.

I'm starting to believe they are going to run the table. They are in new systems with a lot of young players; they have had injuries at key positions; they are now healthy; they are ready.

Yes, I think the game plan is similar to the KC game. Run, run, run to set up the play action bomb. I think this game will be a better test to see how the D is coming along because KC's offense is offensive. I have faith the Bills will score at least 24, so this game will be on the D to hold Pitt to less.

They need a big win at Pittsburgh, not a squeak by. A convincing, confidence building win to take into the Jets game. Win the next two, and the scenario starts to play out.

I ate at his place in 2004. Cost me some coin for the 7 course menu with pairings, but it was one of the best meals I ever experienced.

I looked at that last week, but not in the detail you have. I think it comes down to 9-7 and tie-breakers based on the schedules of the possible contenders. The Bills have to finish second in the division at 9-7 to have a shot.

Thanks, that clearly shows Stevie wasn't just blowing hot air.

It's not productive if it goes into paper investment; all it does is raise asset prices. Don't confuse savings with investment. Chef: getting back to the original point, Gross argues to restore the cap gains tax and eliminate the carried interest loophole. Given the spending propensities, raising taxes on the top will not have a big impact on aggregate demand. As for getting the poor more income, one of the purposes of a progressive tax system.

WB himself would tell you that putting more money into the hands of the guy in the paper hat would be better for his companies than putting more money into his hands. One person will spend it, and one won't. Which one generates more sales revenues for firms?

Pitt will gear up to stop spiller and FJ, opening up the play-action bombs. I see the Bills winning this 27-20.

I gave the marginal rates, which shows the consumption for each additional dollar earned. If you want the most bang for the buck, who should get a tax cut?

Pittsburgh's defense is 31st against the run; Buffalo's offense is 6th in the run game. This bodes well for an away game--more running, less passing. Pittsburgh's strength on offense is the passing game under Roethlisberger, but they've also given up 31 sacks. Buffalo's pass-D has improved with Byrd and Gilmore back.. They should be able to win this with either EJ or Lewis at the controls.

Good point. If that direct investment happens to occur in Mexico, there isn't much of an impact in the US. Regarding your other argument, the rich spend about 53 cents out of each additional dollar earned, while the poor spend 95 cents.

I couldn't agree more, especially the payroll tax since it's a tax on hiring workers.

While the defense did a very good job yesterday, don't put them on a pedestal just yet. If you rightly throw out the Jax game, KC has scored only 2 offensive TDs in their last 3 away games. In fact, their defense has scored more TDs. They are not a good offensive team.

That's what Tasker is trying to do as well. He'll create a condition to meet his argument, though I'm waiting for the argument. Tasker, can we simply start playing if I say, "yes, resources are finite"?

EJ has proven nothing which means he hasn't proven he is NOT a franchise QB. I think what we do know is that he is at best a good manager of the game and won't create as many TOs as we've seen with Lewis and Tuel. As most posters have argued, with EJ this team is probably 5-4. Think about what that suggests. A really good football team can become a playoff contender with a QB who can manage the game without a lot of TOs. Obviously, an elite QB turns this team into a top-flight contender, but you could say that about a lot of teams. I agree with the OP, this is a very good team, that is well-coached, and heading in the right direction.

I thought this game showed how good this coaching staff is. The only reason the Bills lost was due to a raw, non-drafted rookie at QB. Any QB with a little experience sees the breakdown in coverage and hits Stevie for the TD. Also, I think the reason they aired it out with Tuel was they were safer passes for him. He was terrible over the middle. The other safe passes were sideline to the TE.

Back to the original point. It depends on the time horizon, which is why I asked in the first post. In the long run, there doesn't appear to be a limit; growth has ensued for several hundred years. Maybe in the limit, but that assumption is meaningless for the point you want to make. Now, in the shorter run, we're constrained by the capital stock, but the only time the US has operated at capacity, since it became a developed economy, was during WW2. So, do you have a point that you're going to try and make, or are you going to keep dancing? I assume you are going to argue that government takes resources away from the private sector, but that can only happen when all resources are fully employed in the short run--again, only during war has the US experienced fully employed resources.