1984Echoes

PS: One more thing on China: If we were to go to financial war against China, including support from the EU and other western style democracies (all the Asian countries I listed above, plus NZ/ Australia, etc...), just as we have done against Russia... China has no one to turn to. Russia can turn to China. That's to Russia's benefit. China is still a lifeline for them. But China cannot turn to Russia for any economic lifeline as we all know how nothing an economy Russia actually has. Who does China turn to? Attacking back against the US & EU & other countries... economically? That doesn't help them or protect them in an economic war. They are also damaged in a direct economic war, without having the fallback that Russia has with China...

Yeah, I know your thoughts on him... But he's not a UFA; in fact he's signed through 2025 I believe. Definitely not a FA which is why their asking price is so high and they're in no rush for a deal because they have time/ no pressure.

The EU and USA have for several years spoken of getting tougher on China's cheating/ theft/ economic under-handed tactics... So of course I can see China pushing for a wedge between the US and EU countries. The question I have is... if China is seeing attempts against their country's tactics - disjointed at times but, definitely anti-China, including a concerted effort by SE Asian countries and Australia/ Japan/ S Korea/ Canada/ USA/ Mexico to create a block-agreement under the TPP to thwart Chinese practices (that Trump idiotically got out of & then a year later begged to get back in after he realized what the agreement actually did...) - and is now seeing the effect of a threat of danger against the NATO alliance (EU & North American countries) by way of Russia's invasion of Ukraine... ... At what point does Xi Jinping consider a tactical change for China towards a more partnership-of-equals approach instead of a China-is-going-to-replace the USA and dominate-the world approach? Or will they ever even consider such a change in tact?

It's why I wouldn't mind making a play for Chychrun. But I don't think we have the right assets...

IE: Just my opinion but... I really look at Jabari Smith as the only franchise type guy. Ivey-Banchero-anyone else... seem like good players, but not franchise. If we're at #2 and someone offered two 1sts and two 2nds to drop to #'s 3 through... 5? 6? I'm definitely thinking of saying yes to that. Even at 6 I think we're getting a player that is not much different than at #2... We won't get that kind of crazy offer... I'm just sayin'...

Depends on if other teams are looking at these guys as franchise players or as a not-very-strong class. If no one seems to be a franchise guy, some teams will prefer more assets/ chances rather than just one. Just guessing though...

Close... I'm an extremely blunt, honest-to-a-fault, wildly emotional, backend boomer... Wait! Is that the same thing? Anyways, yeah... thanks for the positive comments!

One last question/ issue: Can we trade up/ afford to trade up?

I was thinking more along the lines of explanation with the possibility of opening up doors/ mind... Probably no chance of that but.. just thought I would give it a try...

The flipside is that if DraftNet is correct, then Jabari-Ivey are going 1-2 in the draft and, if we're at #3 or lower, then what does the rest of the Pistons' draft board look like? I'm just about on board with Ivey as the #2 guy. But again, Smith goes 1 and Ivey goes 2 and we're at a lower draft spot... now what? No matter what spot we're in, aside from getting #1... we've gotta be thinking on a Plan B IMO...

Let me put this a different way: I voted for Bush in 2004. After voting for Gore in 2000. Knowing that Bush was full of it with Iraq's "WMD's" and that he and his leadership team (specifically Cheney & Rumsfeld) were making total hash of Iraq on-the-ground (Sunni & Shia were in full civil war at the time...) and also that it was asinine to even be in Iraq if we were serious about going after Bin Laden and dismantling his terrorist network. So Archie, why would I have voted for Bush in 2004?

He's finding out the answer to that really quickly. Like in the past two weeks.

Trump is scum. Pure scum. Outside of Trump, my political views are closely aligned with Teddy Roosevelt Republicanism, FDR Democrat, Abraham Lincoln Republican (preservation of the Union, anti-slavery), Reagan military alignment, Fed Reserve conservatism (1st priority control inflation, 2nd priority facilitate maximum employment), collective security (NATO) and globalist economy (TPP, NAFTA, lower trade barriers, and conversely "trade" or "tariff" wars are asinine), Democratic centrist, invest in domestic infrastructure and future leading industries to the benefit of American Economic leadership in the world, atheist or strict separation of church & state, fiercely Independent... There's not a whole lot of partisan hackery in there. More closely aligned with "make the best decision for the American people/ future" than anything else. But if you want to try to find some partisan hackery in there... go for it.

That's because you wear glasses that only allow you to see one thing. And one thing only. You are blinded. Completely. To partisan hackery. Completely unable to honestly see anything except what you want to see... which is a very dishonest way of living/ discussing anything.

Who then tries to overthrow the Constitution of the United States. Our Democracy. And whose supporters still love him anyways. Maybe even because (all) of the above...

I just want the guy who makes the best decisions for this country. Not for a White Trash Bigoted/Fascist base only.

With all this multiverse stuff going on... Which Universe do you live in Archie Bunker? Because it isn't this one. Are you visiting us from MAGA Universe? Dementia Universe? Live-in-my-Mom's-Basement Universe? Partisan-Hackery-Supreme Universe? Fog-of-my-own-Farts Universe? (Last one was Jim Cowen's suggestion...). I need to know because I want to avoid your universe. There is definitely something wrong, very very wrong, with your universe. I can't quite put my finger on it...

pretty much...

I would love to have the ability to do that myself (I think we all would...) But, no... I'm in the small-denomination contribution group...

I put a chunk of money (and have kept doing it over the past 2+ months) into different oil stocks and ETF's this year... doing really well there along with other commodity stocks/ ETF's I have...

Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis (born in Ukraine) are sending (have $16 mill right now) a proposed $30 mill in donations to Ukraine; although I believe they are contributing $3 mill out of that total... That's a BIG chunk of money from Leo himself. Damn! Good job!

Yeah... BIG surprise there... for everyone! Putin. NATO. EU. Germany. Ukraine. USA. No one expected Scholz to react this way... with Thor's Hammer! And he did.

The impact of that will be negligible in America. It's Europe that would get pounded by banning Russian oil/ gas. Which is why they can't do it yet. Probably not before the end of this year. Which means the U.S. banning Russian oil will have... minimal effect.

You mean since Nixon's stagflation, right?

I think they have. I thought I saw that 2022 YTD (year-to-date) was close to 0% already, or just above that. Last year 10% of our imported oil was Russian.