JimBob2232

Perhaps the correct thing here is to have one of the newest elected members of the HOF toss the coin...

While I do like thurman up there. Couple comments.... 1) If it is going to be long term, I think we should honor the entire superbowl teams, or at least the key guys. Thurman is great, but Kelly, Bruce, Andre, Tasker, et al., should be up there as well. Perhaps a montage/collage of the top 5 guys or so from those teams. 2) While I love these old guys, for some reason I am feeling like im living in the past when I see Thurman up there... 3) Can you work on a rotating script, where sometimes when you come to TBD you see the old clan, and sometimes you see the new regime? Might be a good way to mix it up. But CONGRATS THURMAN!

Perhaps true. He was good. But there is no denying the last year or two he was here, he looked average at best. Too much money for the production we were getting out of him. Now, perhaps that was gilbride, perhaps it was any number of things, but he needed a change of scenery.

Levy To Present Thomas? Thurman Thomas may be following in the footsteps of fellow Hall of Fame teammate Jim Kelly. Thomas said in an interview on the NFL Network that he plans on having Marv Levy be his presenter for induction at the Hall of Fame ceremonies on August 4th. Levy is no stranger to the podium in Canton, he is a Hall of Famer himself and also presented Kelly for induction. Thomas said he told Levy years ago that he wants him to present him if he ever got in the Hall of Fame.

So do the colts. Peyton Manning comes to mind....

And the syracuse boys...Freeney and Harrison

Really? What number you at now?

The only thing thats a joke is how much money we pay in federal taxes. I dont see widespread evasion of income taxes. I dont see widespread evasion of state sales taxes. I dont see a widespread evasion of national sales taxes if invoked. I just dont see it.

I hope we make him "tackle eligible" often next season

If you want to have a debate on other taxes, I am game for them as well. But this thread has been about income taxes. So am I hearing correctly that you would rather have a "wealth tax" than an "income tax"?

And you assisted bush by paying federal taxes last year. Guess its off to the slammer for you as well..

What...the...???????? Do you read the stuff you post as gospel to see if it proves your point? Cuz this doesnt help you AT ALL. Taxes are being paid in Virginia. If there was a national sales tax, taxes would STILL be paid in virginia. This purchase would not go un-taxed at the federal level. New York would still be losing out on revenue. This is a serious issue, one which needs to be dealt with. But it offers ZERO proof people would be able to get out of paying a national sales tax on a widespread basis. If it proves anything, it proves that taxes in new york are too high to begin with! This is a law enforcement issue, not a federal taxation issue.

Why do people insist that the government is so inefficient and slow and then in almost the same breath, mention socialized health care?!

Its one damn sweater! Using that logic, how can New Hampshire fund an entire state with a 3 dollar sweater tax? Proponents of a flat tax typically use the 17% number as what would be necessary. And the effective tax rate in 2004 was about 12.1%. So I think even 17 percent is a little high...but that can be debated as a separate issue. Your 50 dollar sweater would be $57.50 with a 15% federal sales tax. Black market yachts? Please. All it takes is a little enforcement by law enforcement. Heck, the entire IRS can be abolished, we can establish a much much smaller tax enforcement agency if needed. We have state consumption taxes now. How often do you think this type of behavior occurs today?

You are confusing wealth with income. We have an income tax in this country. The wealthy pay NO TAXES if they have NO INCOME. But lets use your analogy... The top one percent of wage earners should pay 33% of all taxes you say...okay...well according to the IRS, in 2004, they paid 36.89% of the taxes. (Cant find 2005 data). The bottom 80 percent should pay 15% you say. According to the IRS, the bottom 75% (IRS uses 75% as a break point), pay 15.14%. Obviously if you expand this to the bottom 80, the total tax burden would increase (somewhere between 17 and 20 percent) So, even with your logic, the rich are paying more than they need to, and the poor (the bottom 50 percent or so), are not paying their fair share. Not that I agree with your logic at all, I'm just saying that even IF you use your logic, your argument, once again, is completely flawed.

Are Crayons and Molson the same person? Wow. That sweater you pay 50 bucks for, would cost you maybe 55-57 bucks with a consumption tax. The difference is that if you make 50k a year, you dont pay 8k a year in federal income taxes, like you do now (just pulling a number out). As for the drug dealer...his behavior probably wouldnt change based on this...but when he went to purchase that $50k escalade, he would pay 5k extra in taxes. Right now, that money is not being taxed at the federal level. Just an example.

Because I live in Virginia! I'll try frying them normally and then throwing them under the broiler for a few minutes at the game...thanks for your help

ive seen that before. Not a better, more accurate depiction of our current tax system exists. I find it funny when i talk to people who are against the current tax system based on the "tax cuts for the rich" philosophy, and "the rich dont pay enough" philosophy, but are adamant about having a "flat tax" where everyone pays 17% or whatever. These are the people who are so oblivious to the important topics of our time, that the country would be better served if they stayed out of the voting booths until they learn a little about how government really works. But I digress.. Personally, I am in favor of consumption taxes. Get rid of the income tax entirely. This way, you buy a luxury yacht, you pay taxes. The more you spend, the more you pay. This way, the folks who earn less, pay less in taxes. The drug dealer not claiming millions on his 1040, will have to pay taxes on that new pimped out escalade, or the bling. If you earn less, you pay less. If you earn more, you pay proportional to what you spend. This would also encourage much needed personal savings in this country. Its a solid plan. Course, we have to get rid of the income tax entirely...and possibly find a way to make the first $10k or so of expenditures for everyone tax free.

Yeah, figured id get these replies! I know, i know...but in reality, if I make real wings, they will be cold by the time they are served. Perhaps I can deep fry them and then toss them in a crock pot just to keep warm... I dont know. Really the host should be doing the wings and I can make something else...but alas, its not to be....

The ONLY way I would support this is if every team gives up one home game to play out of the country. Remember the outrage last year when the Giants got an extra home game because of Katrina? Its equally as unfair to the Dolphins (and for the Giants, its payback). The schedule is already set for years in advance. Who cares, the NFL does not need to be a worldwide game. Nor does Soccer. We already have american football in europe. Nobody cares. the NFL isnt going to be any different. Imagine if England played the Netherlands in soccer in Chicago. Would you go? Would you care? I might if I was living in Chicago. I might if I knew it would be remotely the same as if it was being played in London. I might if I could name ANY player on either of the teams. But I cant. Would it help soccer succeed in the US? Unlikely.

I have been tasked with bringing the chicken wings to the big game this year. I wish to make them in a crock pot so I can bring it along and keep them warm during the game. Any good crock pot recipies out there? Ideally I would have 2 types, One a traditional spicy hot wing, and the other a sweeter bbq, honey, etc. type of wing. Any suggestions?

Matching 100% up to 5 percent 401K, 4 weeks vacation a year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?sectio...&id=2751030

They can always sit the other direction! Or, how about this. Put a mirror opposite the crapper. Most of the football game will still be visible even if reversed by a mirror.

It seems that ESPN has been very desirous of a black head coach to do well.