PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby ponyte » Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:16 pm

well travelled pony wrote:
ponyte wrote:This hasn't got crap to do with athletes. It’s about taxpayers. California is in a financial bind and needs more tax dollars. What better source than kids. They get to pay huge tax rates if they are really special athletes and some taxes if just a so-so guy. Most athletes will get nothing of course but the state doesn't care about that. It only wants more money. These kids will not be a non-profit or state entity shielded from tax liabilities.

It may force big time college sports to face some type of consideration. Imagine all the sports (mainly women's but many men's as well) that do not benefit. How does the university deal with that? This may create two categories of college athletes with the majority being left behind financially.

What sounds like a great idea after a few drinks too many in Sacramento may turn out to be a nightmare.


Laughable statements. You might want to know facts before opening your mouth.

California currently sits on a $21 billion surplus. The economy boomed since 2011. You may disagree with Newsome, but he is no fool.

Go Ponies!

Your referenece to $30 billion in surplus was made by then Gov. Brown in a NPR interview and I quote, "By the way we not only have a $14 billion surplus — a rainy day fund that's locked in for uncertain times in the future — we have a $15 billion spendable deficit right now, and that deficit surplus. So yeah, there's a lot of money. We're talking closer to $30 billion." Nice semantic, but most would call that the usual provarication of politician. What the Freak is a "Deficit surplus"? Isn't that commonly called an oxymoron?

The Surplus isn't a goobernment design but forced on the California goobernment by Proposition 2 passed by the voters in 2014. It provides for a surplus and limits how much the goobernment can actual use and whenit can use the surplus. Please note Brown's first reference to the surplus and its limited use in the first part of his starment whcih ic actually the only true thing he says.

Thus, Your Beloved Gov. Newsome that wants to raise, amoung others, a health care tax, is doing so because he can't, by California Constitutional, law tap into the "surplus". The actual surplus is estimated to be far less than the $30 billion Brown so elequently created. It can and will be wiped out by a recession. To fund all the programs California wants to provide, tax revenue other than a limited surplus must be created.

I don't give a flying Freak at the moon about California and its goobernment. Or its govenor. I do hate it when politicians, ALL POLITICIANS, use canards and prevarication to out right lie to us!

Oh, and learn a bit more about California law and the limits Prop 2 puts on the Goobernment. You might actually sound like you have more synapses than an one cell ameba next time.
User avatar
ponyte
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 11075
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:01 am
Location: Nw Orleans, LA region

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby 82Pony » Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:17 pm

leopold wrote:See, people are saying that is what California wants. They want the NCAA to declare them ineligible so they can sue them for monopolistic practices. I'm not sure where it goes from there, but that sounds potentially catastrophic.

They are opening a Pandora's Box with unlimited money from alum/donors who will be able to buy the best players for sudo-endorsements.
User avatar
82Pony
Varsity
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:02 pm

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby well travelled pony » Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:37 am

ponyte wrote:
well travelled pony wrote:
ponyte wrote:This hasn't got crap to do with athletes. It’s about taxpayers. California is in a financial bind and needs more tax dollars. What better source than kids. They get to pay huge tax rates if they are really special athletes and some taxes if just a so-so guy. Most athletes will get nothing of course but the state doesn't care about that. It only wants more money. These kids will not be a non-profit or state entity shielded from tax liabilities.

It may force big time college sports to face some type of consideration. Imagine all the sports (mainly women's but many men's as well) that do not benefit. How does the university deal with that? This may create two categories of college athletes with the majority being left behind financially.

What sounds like a great idea after a few drinks too many in Sacramento may turn out to be a nightmare.


Laughable statements. You might want to know facts before opening your mouth.

California currently sits on a $21 billion surplus. The economy boomed since 2011. You may disagree with Newsome, but he is no fool.

Go Ponies!

Your referenece to $30 billion in surplus was made by then Gov. Brown in a NPR interview and I quote, "By the way we not only have a $14 billion surplus — a rainy day fund that's locked in for uncertain times in the future — we have a $15 billion spendable deficit right now, and that deficit surplus. So yeah, there's a lot of money. We're talking closer to $30 billion." Nice semantic, but most would call that the usual provarication of politician. What the Freak is a "Deficit surplus"? Isn't that commonly called an oxymoron?

The Surplus isn't a goobernment design but forced on the California goobernment by Proposition 2 passed by the voters in 2014. It provides for a surplus and limits how much the goobernment can actual use and whenit can use the surplus. Please note Brown's first reference to the surplus and its limited use in the first part of his starment whcih ic actually the only true thing he says.

Thus, Your Beloved Gov. Newsome that wants to raise, amoung others, a health care tax, is doing so because he can't, by California Constitutional, law tap into the "surplus". The actual surplus is estimated to be far less than the $30 billion Brown so elequently created. It can and will be wiped out by a recession. To fund all the programs California wants to provide, tax revenue other than a limited surplus must be created.

I don't give a flying Freak at the moon about California and its goobernment. Or its govenor. I do hate it when politicians, ALL POLITICIANS, use canards and prevarication to out right lie to us!

Oh, and learn a bit more about California law and the limits Prop 2 puts on the Goobernment. You might actually sound like you have more synapses than an one cell ameba next time.


First off, I live in Colorado. Was raised in California. Lived in North Carolina too.

As for all your bs on the surplus, READ...

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/06/10/ ... 1-billion/

Or this...
https://www.kpbs.org/news/2019/jan/10/c ... te-budget/
So, your point again is foolish.

California economy...

https://www.businessinsider.com/califor ... cts-2019-4

So, just go ahead and be a blowhard... I am here as a SMU alumni. Proud. Support my team and school. Can we please stay on that?? Instead of stupid comments? Do you not understand that the University needs outreach, including all those kids, like me, to go to SMU from other places other than Texas??

Your comments are a disservice to the school.

Let's keep it positive about the University and the greatness of its sports teams.

Go Ponies!
User avatar
well travelled pony
All-American
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:29 pm
Location: Castle Rock, CO

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby Arkpony » Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:38 am

Of course
Long live Inez Perez!
User avatar
Arkpony
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6241
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: Little Rock, AR USA

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby Fooball » Sat Sep 14, 2019 11:21 am

ponyte wrote:
well travelled pony wrote:
ponyte wrote:This hasn't got crap to do with athletes. It’s about taxpayers. California is in a financial bind and needs more tax dollars. What better source than kids. They get to pay huge tax rates if they are really special athletes and some taxes if just a so-so guy. Most athletes will get nothing of course but the state doesn't care about that. It only wants more money. These kids will not be a non-profit or state entity shielded from tax liabilities.

It may force big time college sports to face some type of consideration. Imagine all the sports (mainly women's but many men's as well) that do not benefit. How does the university deal with that? This may create two categories of college athletes with the majority being left behind financially.

What sounds like a great idea after a few drinks too many in Sacramento may turn out to be a nightmare.


Laughable statements. You might want to know facts before opening your mouth.

California currently sits on a $21 billion surplus. The economy boomed since 2011. You may disagree with Newsome, but he is no fool.

Go Ponies!

Your referenece to $30 billion in surplus was made by then Gov. Brown in a NPR interview and I quote, "By the way we not only have a $14 billion surplus — a rainy day fund that's locked in for uncertain times in the future — we have a $15 billion spendable deficit right now, and that deficit surplus. So yeah, there's a lot of money. We're talking closer to $30 billion." Nice semantic, but most would call that the usual provarication of politician. What the Freak is a "Deficit surplus"? Isn't that commonly called an oxymoron?

The Surplus isn't a goobernment design but forced on the California goobernment by Proposition 2 passed by the voters in 2014. It provides for a surplus and limits how much the goobernment can actual use and whenit can use the surplus. Please note Brown's first reference to the surplus and its limited use in the first part of his starment whcih ic actually the only true thing he says.

Thus, Your Beloved Gov. Newsome that wants to raise, amoung others, a health care tax, is doing so because he can't, by California Constitutional, law tap into the "surplus". The actual surplus is estimated to be far less than the $30 billion Brown so elequently created. It can and will be wiped out by a recession. To fund all the programs California wants to provide, tax revenue other than a limited surplus must be created.

I don't give a flying Freak at the moon about California and its goobernment. Or its govenor. I do hate it when politicians, ALL POLITICIANS, use canards and prevarication to out right lie to us!

Oh, and learn a bit more about California law and the limits Prop 2 puts on the Goobernment. You might actually sound like you have more synapses than an one cell ameba next time.
So, you make enough money to fund the 401K contribution that you signed up for and then still have money left over and decide to save that too.

How is that a desperate or hamstrung government in need of more funds? And how is that not a surplus?

This post is as dumb as it is verbose.
Fooball
Junior Varsity
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 4:01 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby ponyte » Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:10 pm

I now understand why goobernments so easily fool people with clever prevarication and canards.
User avatar
ponyte
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 11075
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:01 am
Location: Nw Orleans, LA region

Re: California passes NCAA Athlete Endorsement Bill

Postby Fooball » Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:49 pm

You didn't answer the question.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Fooball
Junior Varsity
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 4:01 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Previous

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: peruna81 and 30 guests

 
cron