Hts121

Cardale lost his job at OSU to a guy who is not.very high on the NFL radar. Perhaps the most overhyped Buckeye ever. Love him for what he did in that playoff run. Never had faith in him as an NFL QB

I love Adams, but I'm still traumatized by taking Gilbert over Roby a few years back. I seem to recall being labeled a 'unabashed homer' on here when I said Roby was the best CB in that draft. Hooker's ceiling is about as high as any S I can remember since Sean Taylor. Adams is more NFL ready from Day 1 though.

^I'd be down with that. I'm not in love with anyone at #1

With the first three picks, I need a QB, an edge rusher, and a safety. I don't care in what order they are picked. For QB, I'm firmly in the Watson camp, but would not be disappointed in Kizer. Not sold on Trubisky. As much as I would love to like the local kid, I don't.... certainly not at 1. For edge rusher, I'm fine with taking Garrett #1 overall. Not in love with the kid (I think he takes some plays off and is a better athlete than he is a football player), but the talent is undeniable. If not him, Barnett intrigues me at #12. For safety, Adams, Hooker, and Peppers are all on my board and very high (no pun intended for Peppers). I love all three.

The sexual assault allegations against Gareon Conley (he is not charged yet) will cost him millions. He was a consensus top 15 pick and now might not even be drafted. If the Pats take him with their first pick (second round), I want an investigation.

1, Ohio - home 2. N. Carolina - second home 3. California - all things being even (cost, proximity to family), my dream home 4. Hawaii - all things being even, my other dream home 5. Pennsylvania - my roots are here

The police 'can cite them' Who did the sherrifs help? The security guards?

It's a misnomer because they are allowed to chase in some circumstances and are not in others. Calling it a 'no chase' policy would imply they are never allowed to chase after a suspect, which is definitely not true. I work with Public Safety for the City a lot and the amount of confusion over stuff like this (once passed from the cops to third parties) is mind-boggling at times. Let's take your example. A guy rides his bike right up to a police cruiser and kicks it. I don't care what their understanding is, I will not believe that the cops are not allowed to chase that guy unless I hear it directly from Director McGrath (not Asst Dir. Eckart). I would think there would be some felony implications in that scenario. What happens in situations like these is that the police get frustrated by some new policy they don't like and it turns into a game of telephone as to what the policy precisely is. By the time it reaches the public, the story is that suspect are allowed to spit in a cops face without consequence. .

It's Cleveland's city government. They'd classify the time the sun sets if they could. They don't get to determine what is and what is not a public record. It's no secret. I have actually seen it, I just don't know where the public access to it is. From what I recall, it limited high speed chases in certain instances, but not all. And it's littered with exceptions to be exercised at the officers discretion or with supervisor approval. So calling it a 'no chase' policy is a bit of a misnomer.

At what age must you start to believe that the city/country/world is going to hell in a hand basket?

Does anyone have the actual text of this "no chase policy"?

I wouldn't go that far. They are indeed understaffed and the City itself poses many challenges which preclude effective order-maintenance policing. Most of the worst neighborhood no longer have the density or design to allow for foot patrols. There's no easy solution, consent decree or not.

Without speaking in generalities, how has the consent decree "hamstrung" the CPD? If you are talking about the components aimed at reducing excessive use of force, the City had already put many of those practices in place before the consent decree was officially entered, and is not likely to eliminate those new policies. Seems to me that the consent decree is working - at least as it pertains to use of force policies - as we haven't seen reoccurrence of the national embarrassments which led to it in the first place.

I also fail to understand why the FBI would get involved in the Kuznik murders. Are there some suspicions that this may be mob related and give rise to a RICO case? Seems to me that the Kuznik case has received more coverage than most murders in Cleveland? Is there a reason why it should receive more?

^Exactly. He used two different stances. First the one Korver just taught him and then back to the one he used for a good chunk of the season. Playoff time is no time to experiment with your form. But a lot of those misses came at the end when he was exhausted. He's always been notorious for missing FTs at the end of a tough game. The question is why was the inbound play going to him when they knew Indy was going to foul.

He is a 74% career FT shooter. He shot 67% this year. Like I said, he needs to accept it and stop trying to make adjustments. Very hard to be a great free throw shooter with hands the size of his. Not impossible..... but difficult.

^He just tried to re-learn by working with Korver. He changed his stance, but then switched back towards the end last night. He probably just needs to accept that he will never shoot much better than 75% from the line and stick with whatever form he is most comfortable with.

^^Damn. I only got $20 million handed to me. Seriously though, I think that stocks are a bad example to use because they can be placed in investment accounts that have a TOD/POD designation and the tax consequences, if any, would be through capital gain only when the stocks are liquidated. The rest of your argument sounds an awful lot like voodoo economics.

The estate and inheritance taxes have always been two separate things. An inheritance, as I understand it, is taxed at different rates depending on your relationship to the deceased. If you are a distant relative or friend, you are taxed at a much higher rate than a child. Correct. But I wasn't specifically contemplating inheritance taxes in a way a state like NJ imposes them (similar to what you describe). I'm simply proposing there be no tax to the estate, but rather any tax burden be passed on to the individual beneficiaries through the use of a form like a K1. The beneficiaries would do much better because the estate tax rate for things that are still taxable (such as income earned by the estate) is much higher than the rates most individuals pay, but some public revenue would be raised as well.

^On speculative subjects such as this, you can find a study which will lend support to any conclusion you desire. I'm totally in favor of eliminating estate taxes. But I do think inheritance taxes (there's a difference) should be imposed. The inheritance, whether through probate, trust, or some other mechanism, is realized, then it would be taxed as part of your income. So the estate wouldn't be taxed, but the beneficiary would. This would be most impactful on already rich people inheriting more wealth and less so on middle class families inheriting a small sum. I'd even be in favor of some threshold for inheritance tax.... maybe exempting the first $100k per beneficiary..... especially for those in lower tax brackets.

Federal estate tax threshold is $5.5 million. So the first $5.5 million of an estate is not taxable. It used to be much lower. Many, if not most, states have done away with their own estate taxes. In Ohio, the threshold used to be $337K, and only the amounts above that amount were taxed. Regardless, almost all multi-millionaires are smart enough to get some very good estate planning done before their death and their wealth does not pass through estates, but rather trusts and, to a lessor extend, TOD/POD designations. Very difficult to track the transfer of wealth when it is done through a trust that will pay for your tuition, mortgage, health care, 'expenses', etc. Sound estate planning is why the revenue ends up being much less than what it should be.

^This is where I'm confused. One confirmed kill, correct? But he claimed to have killed a dozen? I think that claim, plus the first murder being on Facebook Live, is causing all of the national attention.

^There is also word that there was a ping in or near Erie PA. Stay vigilant until he is caught Cleveland folks.

^I think that is a myth

We need a helluva lot more than what you think is "anti-growth activism". It is extremely naïve to think otherwise. And I don't know that we have any height restrictions. I was just more commenting on the notion that you need height to have great density. Not true at all..... especially here in Cleveland where are best pockets of density have very little height at all..... such as LI