Doc Brown

It's worse because it has a more direct economic impact of those effected. It doesn't make Trump correct in lying about Mexico paying for the wall and then circumventing congress to redirect Pentagon funds to pay for portions of the wall.

Introduce bills like this that start to address the root cause of the problem. https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4049576-senate-republicans-introduce-plan-to-tackle-student-loan-debt/ The first two bills in the package specifically deal with how colleges give students information before they decide to attend. The “College Transparency Act (CTA)” would reform the college data reporting system so students have better information about outcomes at schools before committing to a university. The “Understanding the True Cost of College Act” will require schools to have a similar style for their financial aid letters with a breakdown of the aid so students can better compare offers. The last three bills deal directly with student loans, including how information is given to borrowers and limiting some borrowing. The “Informed Student Borrower Act” requires students to be more informed when applying for a loan by acknowledging they received student loan entrance materials or they participated in entrance counseling. The students would receive materials that show how long it would take to pay off their loans, how much the monthly payments would be and what they will likely make going to a certain school and program. The students would receive this information yearly. The fourth bill addresses the nine different student loan repayment options the Department of Education offers. These options, with eligibility based on income and loan type, gave borrowers different timeline options for paying off their loans and the amount they would owe each month. The bill cuts those repayment options down to two to simplify the process. The standard 10-year repayment plan for borrowers would remain and the REPAYE program would stay, with some changes. The REPAYE program gives loan forgiveness earlier to low-income individuals who have low balances on their loans. I'm not talking about taking out a college loan. I'm talking about spending money they were planning on saving to pay off their loans they assumed would be forgiven.

Alf. I'd had more sympathy if this wasn't known before they signed on the dotted line. Not a fan of Biden telling people that he's going to forgive their student loan debt knowing that it didn't have the constitutional mustard to go through. People made personal financial decisions counting on that debt being forgiven.

You were and I agree the Chiefs win that divisional game 8 out of 10 times without Josh playing out of his mind like he did. I think last year's regular season game where Josh didn't play out of his mind and we still won showed just how important Von is. It's why Beane signed him and if we don't get that pass rush difference maker in the playoffs then we don't have a chance.

Last year's regular season game vs. them was basically a coin flip but the reason we'd win 5 out of 10 times was the addition of Von Miller. He had two sacks that forced punts and his pressure on a three man rush is what led to the game winning pick. Keeping him healthy next year is vital.

How many Americans actually follow politics though? I would venture a majority believe the whataboutism between debt forgiveness and PPP loans despite the latter being constitutional.

That's what I meant. It's manipulative but there's a lot of young people who will fall for it. It's plain cruel to people and families who were counting on it.

Knew this would happen and now will try something else illegal to rally support for 2024. Even though there's no way of implementing it even if elected.

Why? He's one reason for all the layoffs.

They're allowed to do that right now outside team facilities. My concern is a player could become addicted and would turn to the NFL (where they can actually influence their bets) in order to make up for the money they will inevitably lose betting other sports. I just don't understand why they make all sports betting illegal if you're employed by the NFL or an NFL team in any capacity. If you want to gamble, don't work for the NFL. It makes it very simple for NFL players to understand.

Are you a Joe Ferguson fan?

I understand that and I'd have no problem with Diggs missing voluntary OTA's because he's an established veteran who's work ethic has never been questioned. However, whatever problem he had Allen/Dorsey/McDermott, he knew they were all going to be there at voluntary OTA's and it would've been a great time to resolve them in mid April instead of waiting to show up when you have to in mid June. Seems like a logical move if he really wanted to win so much more than everyone else like first and ten is suggesting.

Reserved personality, not aggressive enough, and tied to the Rex Ryan regime.

Come on man. You made the claim that Allen wasn't as focused and committed as he was before and Diggs was calling him out on that. Allen showing up at voluntary OTA's and Diggs not showing up kind of throws a wrench in your theory.

I'd pry go with solid team construction, elite quarterback play, excellent coaching, and a lot of luck with injuries. As for the question, the Bills losing four straight Super Bowls is not bad because that means you won four straight AFC Conference championships. To me that's more impressive than winning one Super Bowl.

It was in the heat of the moment. I expect better.

They should now with the suspensions and you and I are on the same page that they shouldn't be allowed to gamble at all while employed by an NFL team. Gambling is way less taboo than when Pete Rose was banned so I think a ban from the game permanently is a little harsh. Three years seems like an effective deterrent.

Correct but I feel like blaming McDermott is like blaming me for complaining my wife's mashed potatoes weren't quite up to her usual standards. She's the one that messed up the recipe even though I may have esculated the situation by pointing out that instant mashed potatoes were better than this bullcrap.

Not sure why you want my take as the only part of me that leans left with the Dems is their approach to health care and education. Especially the former. Both just happen to be the issues I care most about. I agree with the right when it comes to taxes, de-regulation, immigration, gun control (with some exceptions), more police, strong military, less government assistance to able bodied workers, and a lot of the culture issues (I despise CRT theory being part of any curriculum, transgenderism would be better treated as a mental illness, etc.). As far as Poyer goes (who I've always liked), I agree with almost everything he said in the article but I don't think it's a coincidence he chose a Trump (the most polarizing figure in America) owned golf course with over 1,200 other golf courses in Florida for his charity event. He seems like an intelligent person so he had to know that backlash was coming. He could've gotten his message across and still raised money for charity at another golf course. To answer the poll question, I refuse to let family or friends political views get in the way of our relationships no matter how wrong they are.

Nobody gives a damn.

It makes it more likely imo as it will pry clear up around four million in cap space. They could've saved six million by cutting him but they may want both Hopkins and Parker. Bourne is an obvious cut candidate (frees up 5.4m) if they do sign Hopkins.

He's not an idiot. He knew that being the only Bills player to miss the first practice of mandatory mini camp would send a message to the outside world that there was a rift he had with the team.

Agreed, but they didn't become rich by gambling.

There's always been this underlying feeling of unease with Diggs (at least by me) because of how he strategically forced his way out of Minnesota. Now it's just going to be amplified. If it forces Allen and Dorsey to make a concerted effort to force the ball to Diggs I'm cool with that. I just wish he handled his discontent in house like every other Bills player who may have had a problem.

That seems a little harsh but maybe one year for non NFL games and three seasons for any NFL game. The NFLPA has given Goodell free reign on the gambling policy so if I were him I'd ban gambling on anything while employed by the NFL (player, coach, administrators, water boys, etc.). That would clear up any confusion. Like I said, one season for non NFL gambling and three seasons for NFL gambling.