Blueray - PS3 or Dedicated BR Player? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Blueray - PS3 or Dedicated BR Player?



JSE
07-22-2008, 10:23 AM
I'm fairly confident this has been asked and answered many many times but I am lazy and swamped at the moment so.....

I need/want a BR player. I don't play games so PS3 is not mandaroty but I have heard the PS3 can be upgraded unlike the stand alone players. Is this a big issue?

If you suggest the PS3, can it be controlled like a standard BR/DVD player? Is there a remote that I can just hit play and be done with it? I don't want the PS3 if I have to go through lots of menus to get to the BR functions. It's got to be easy enough for the wife to use.

If it matters, I would run the BR player direct to the LCD via HDMI and run the sound via optical/digital coax to my receiver. The receiver does not have HDMI. That will be addressed a little later down the road.


Anyway, thanks for any help you can give me.

L.J.
07-22-2008, 11:31 AM
Yes, the PS3 can be set to auto play. It'll begin to play the inserted disc automatically. You can pick up the BR remote for the PS3 (http://www.amazon.com/Sony-PlayStation-Blu-ray-Disc-Remote/dp/B000M17AVO/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1216753513&sr=8-1) which controls all the functions and is laid out pretty well. If you have a universal remote with learning capabilities, you can pickup the Bluwave remote (http://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-3-Blu-Wave-Remote/dp/B000R5H7KE/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1216753513&sr=8-2), which let's you use a IR remote with the PS3. This controls 99% of the features, except the ability to turn it on. The PS3 will turn on when you put a disc in so no big deal.

I'm extremely happy with my PS3 and highly recommend it as a BR player. Gaming, music/photo/video streaming, SACD, web browsing.....all comes as a bonus if you plan on only using the BR playback. Sony has been faithful on adding new features and improving overall performance. Adding improvements with BR playback(adding BR profile 2.0 (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080118-new-nlu-ray-2-0-spec-makes-ps3-the-most-future-proof-player.html)) and video filtering features for SD playback.

I'm sure you know the only way to get HD audio with the PS3 is through an AVR that accepts MPCM via HDMI. Sounds like you plan on getting one soon so you should be OK. Setup is pretty simple and the PS3 will actually auto detect and optimize your settings for you. Just hook it up and that's about it.

The 40g model goes for $399(there may be some combo deals out there (http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/ref=amb_link_7152702_1?ie=UTF8&docId=1000249361&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=right-1&pf_rd_r=0Y8X2H63XC5B1MT8CMN2&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=414014101&pf_rd_i=14210751)) but doesn't offer all the features of the 80g. It doesn't sound like your concerned with gaming backward compatibility. You also loose SACD playback, media card slots & you only get 2 instead of 4 usb slots. These things may not be important to you though. The price for the 80g is currently $499 but will be dropping to $399 this Sept. Not sure of the features but it sounds like it's gonna be a "40g" model with a larger HD. Here's a chart comparing the 2 currently available models. (http://www.us.playstation.com/ps3/about/specs) The 60g is no longer available for sale.

Rich-n-Texas
07-22-2008, 11:45 AM
That's top notch information you got there from Sir LJ3 Cartman. He is the PS3 w/Blu-ray overlord!

JSE
07-22-2008, 12:12 PM
LOTS OF USEFUL INFO......

Thanks LJ. That's what I needed to here. I'll probably just go for the 40gb model since gaming is not important to me. Nor is SACD. I'm aware I won't get HD Audio so I will upgrade my receiver at a later date. Got a lot of big expenses coming up in the next few months so the receiver will have to take a back seat. For now. :ihih:

Thanks again for all the info.



That's top notch information you got there from Sir LJ3 Cartman. He is the PS3 w/Blu-ray overlord!

Did you get yours yet? Let me know how you like it. I figure if you can operate the PS3.....................well, I should do fine. :ciappa:

johnny p
07-22-2008, 12:29 PM
I have 2 PS3s, and NO games.....

They make great players.... I'm sure I'll get a stand-alone in the future if they make one that does everything the PS3 does!

bobsticks
07-22-2008, 04:59 PM
I have 2 PS3s, and NO games.....

They make great players.... I'm sure I'll get a stand-alone in the future if they make one that does everything the PS3 does!

Yup. I'm right there too...a PS3 and no games. The onboard processor on the Playstation is some serious chit, mang. I'm pretty sure I'd have to start looking at that 2k Denon unit to think about equalling the sound and picture quality.

Rich-n-Texas
07-22-2008, 06:21 PM
Did you get yours yet? Let me know how you like it. I figure if you can operate the PS3.....................well, I should do fine. :ciappa:
It arrived late this afternoon but I haven't integrated it yet (waiting on that $275 Monster HDMI cable and remote). I'll post up my problems questions comments in L.J.'s PS3 thread in OT/Non-Audio.

BTW, I've been tracking the latest Shiner shipment and it seems to have gotten held up in Waxahachie. So sorry. :p

JSE
07-23-2008, 06:22 AM
It arrived late this afternoon but I haven't integrated it yet (waiting on that $275 Monster HDMI cable and remote). I'll post up my problems questions comments in L.J.'s PS3 thread in OT/Non-Audio.

BTW, I've been tracking the latest Shiner shipment and it seems to have gotten held up in Waxahachie. So sorry. :p


Hey, I got "held up" in Waxahachie once before. Long story......................Let's just say I'm not allowed in the Taco Bueno there anymore, or Waxahachie for that matter....:frown2:

JSE
07-23-2008, 07:11 AM
LJ,

Does the PS3 have an Optical and/or Digitial Coax port for audio? And, can I run the HDMI for video and Optical/DigCoax at the same time?

If not, that might be a deal breaker for the PS3.

Rich-n-Texas
07-23-2008, 07:19 AM
Hey, I got "held up" in Waxahachie once before. Long story......................Let's just say I'm not allowed in the Taco Bueno there anymore, or Waxahachie for that matter....:frown2:
I can only imagine. :rolleyes:

The PS3 only has one digital audio output other than the HDMI and it's optical. Not sure about the second part of your question though... yet.

bobsticks
07-23-2008, 07:22 AM
LJ,

Does the PS3 have an Optical and/or Digitial Coax port for audio? And, can I run the HDMI for video and Optical/DigCoax at the same time?

If not, that might be a deal breaker for the PS3.

Not to step on LJ's toes, but it does and you can...so, no excuses.

JSE
07-23-2008, 07:49 AM
Hey Rich and Sticks.......

Thanks for the answers. Looks like I will pick up a PS3 in the next couple of weeks once my schedule calms down a bit.

Rich-n-Texas
07-23-2008, 08:44 AM
Hopefully in the next couple of weeks the model like the one I picked up will be available again. The day after I ordered mine from Newegg, the site showed it as out of stock again. Here's the Sony part number FYI... PS398011.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16868110029

L.J.
07-23-2008, 09:48 AM
Not to step on LJ's toes, but it does and you can...so, no excuses.

It's all good Sticks. Just don't scuff my white on whites :hand:

bobsticks
07-23-2008, 10:10 AM
It's all good Sticks. Just don't scuff my white on whites :hand:

K-Swiss or Jordains? I go with the all white K's myself...

L.J.
07-23-2008, 10:14 AM
K-Swiss or Jordains? I go with the all white K's myself...

K-Swiss...Classics :3:

bobsticks
07-23-2008, 10:16 AM
Good man, the classics never go out of style.

JSE
07-23-2008, 10:34 AM
Doh! One last question. Does the PS3 play regular DVDs? I have a player that up-converts now so it's not a big deal. Just wondering. One player would be nicer than two.

L.J.
07-23-2008, 10:44 AM
Doh! One last question. Does the PS3 play regular DVDs? I have a player that up-converts now so it's not a big deal. Just wondering. One player would be nicer than two.

Yup, does a pretty good job scaling too.

pixelthis
07-24-2008, 11:30 PM
It arrived late this afternoon but I haven't integrated it yet (waiting on that $275 Monster HDMI cable and remote). I'll post up my problems questions comments in L.J.'s PS3 thread in OT/Non-Audio.

BTW, I've been tracking the latest Shiner shipment and it seems to have gotten held up in Waxahachie. So sorry. :p

The signal is digital, a 32 buck cable (phillips) from Walmart
will do fine, or go to
monoprice.com
Theirs are 20 bucks on up.
And some company (forgot the name but its on Harmonys website)
has a PS3 REMOTE FOR 17 BUCKS, the remote sensor plugs into the USB port.
I found this out when the circuit crappy pimplyfaced teens lied to my friend and told him that a Harmony would work with a PS3 , which it wouldnt of course because of its blu tooth nature.
The picture was good but he decided that games wouldnt be important and took it back for a BDP-300, which I think performs better and has 5.1 channel out, but thats just me.

L.J.
07-25-2008, 01:22 PM
The signal is digital, a 32 buck cable (phillips) from Walmart
will do fine, or go to
monoprice.com
Theirs are 20 bucks on up.

You know he was just joking right :sosp:



And some company (forgot the name but its on Harmonys website)
has a PS3 REMOTE FOR 17 BUCKS, the remote sensor plugs into the USB port.
I found this out when the circuit crappy pimplyfaced teens lied to my friend and told him that a Harmony would work with a PS3 , which it wouldnt of course because of its blu tooth nature.

It's the Blu wave remote from NYKO. I use it and it works with my Harmony just fine.



The picture was good but he decided that games wouldnt be important and took it back for a BDP-300, which I think performs better and has 5.1 channel out, but thats just me.

To each his own brotha :thumbsup:

Rich-n-Texas
07-25-2008, 01:59 PM
Bought an $18 Belkin HDMI cable along with the $20 remote L.J. suggested. No tax and free shipping. I'll get the NYKO's codes into the 880 ASAP.

pixelthis
07-27-2008, 11:28 PM
WELL, my friend didnt care for the Sony 300, and while I was setting
his stuff up offered to let me have it until my vacation pay comes in,
he wanted the samsung 1500.
So I am now the proud owner of a bdp-s300 sony blu player.
Spent two hours programming it into the pronto, and its really spectacular. My Vizio can handle the 1080p but it really looks bad,
so I let it go to 720p.
THE BEST SCENE I have seen so far is the hotel check in scene
in casino royale, Bond and his friend is wearing black, the check in clerk is wearing black, and the richly detailed blacks look simply
amazing.
I was surprized by the Samsungs' "low ball" approach, no 5.1 out,
etc, the Sony has a bit meter, elapsed time and other "extras".
The load time others have talked about is a no problem, really,
load times, even for the "java" discs is under a minute, mostly.
And the upconversion is good too, hardware secrets
reports that the upscaled pic is as good as a 1200$ scaler.
One problem, tho, no center or sub on 5.1 out.
GOTTA email Sony about it, and yes its set to 5.1, not stereo, first thing I checked.
This is the latest player, all black front, etc.
Only problem now is that HD broadcast stuff looks a bit "drab".
I cant beleive the black level on this thing, not to mention the color saturation.
I have bought my last DVD. :1:

GMichael
07-28-2008, 05:15 AM
WELL, my friend didnt care for the Sony 300, and while I was setting
his stuff up offered to let me have it until my vacation pay comes in,
he wanted the samsung 1500.
So I am now the proud owner of a bdp-s300 sony blu player.
Spent two hours programming it into the pronto, and its really spectacular. My Vizio can handle the 1080p but it really looks bad,
so I let it go to 720p.
THE BEST SCENE I have seen so far is the hotel check in scene
in casino royale, Bond and his friend is wearing black, the check in clerk is wearing black, and the richly detailed blacks look simply
amazing.
I was surprized by the Samsungs' "low ball" approach, no 5.1 out,
etc, the Sony has a bit meter, elapsed time and other "extras".
The load time others have talked about is a no problem, really,
load times, even for the "java" discs is under a minute, mostly.
And the upconversion is good too, hardware secrets
reports that the upscaled pic is as good as a 1200$ scaler.
One problem, tho, no center or sub on 5.1 out.
GOTTA email Sony about it, and yes its set to 5.1, not stereo, first thing I checked.
This is the latest player, all black front, etc.
Only problem now is that HD broadcast stuff looks a bit "drab".
I cant beleive the black level on this thing, not to mention the color saturation.
I have bought my last DVD. :1:

Have you tried the HDMI or optical out?

JSE
07-28-2008, 06:05 AM
Bought the PS3 over the weekend. I ended up with the 80GB because I could not find any 40GB models anywhere. Maybe because they are being discontinued? Got the remote as well.

Took about 15 minutes to set it up from start to finish. Very easy and staight forward. I have not watched a BlueRay movie yet but I did squeeze in a standard DVD (The Bank Job) last night. Like LJ mentioned, it did a pretty good job upscaling. Very nice picture and great sound. Tonight, I have the BR movie "Jumper" to watch. Probably a lame movie but should be a good introduction to BR. Plus that Bilson girl is hot.

Anyway, thanks again for call the help you guys gave me and I am confident I made a good choice. Might even buy a game one day.............yeah, probably not.

JSE

bobsticks
07-28-2008, 06:30 AM
Congrats mang, that's a good buy. I keep tellin' myself that I'm gonna pick up Metal Gear or Vice City 4 or whatever but it never happens.

I think one of the things you'll be presently surprised about, or at least I have been thusfar, is the general quality of transfers from old movies to the new format. One of the bigger problems I had with the HD-DVD format was the crappy appearance of older films. Yeah, I know that alot depends on the quality of the original filmstock but some of the reissues were horrific. I've been very pleased with what I've seen so far...watched "Full Metal Jacket" the other night and felt like Pix was in the room yellin' at me.

...and that Bilson girl is hot, true 'nuff.


--sticks

L.J.
07-28-2008, 06:59 AM
Welcome to the club brotha! Since your using optical at the moment, rent yourself some BR with DTSMA tracks. Your only gonna get the "core" 1.5mbps for now but man it still sounds freakin' sweet! Fox has ALOT of DTSMA titles.

Rich-n-Texas
07-28-2008, 07:17 AM
Way ta go Cartman! As far as I'm concerned, the 80 gig is a MUCH better bang-for-the-buck than the 40 gig, for only $100 more. Word of caution: keep it well ventilated.

JSE
07-28-2008, 07:21 AM
Welcome to the club brotha! Since your using optical at the moment, rent yourself some BR with DTSMA tracks. Your only gonna get the "core" 1.5mbps for now but man it still sounds freakin' sweet! Fox has ALOT of DTSMA titles.

Thanks LJ and Sticks,


I'll check out some DTSMA titles soon. Can't remember if Jumper has DTS.

The HDMI capable receiver might come later this fall. Lots of funds going to other things like vacation and landscaping/outdoor kitchen right now. I told my wife I "needed" a new receiver and she just shot me "that look". Nuff said, no receiver. For now! Buwahahahahahahahaha! :devil:

What's that saying......... It's better to ask for forgiveness than permission? :idea:

JSE
07-28-2008, 07:28 AM
Way ta go Cartman! As far as I'm concerned, the 80 gig is a MUCH better bang-for-the-buck than the 40 gig, for only $100 more. Word of caution: keep it well ventilated.

I should have enough ventilation. Plus, I have everything on slide-out shelves so I normally just pull the receiver out a bit when playing music or movies just as a precaution. I can do the same for the PS3.

That reminds me, I need to get some photos up of my media center I had made a while back. Turned out great.

pixelthis
07-29-2008, 12:16 AM
Have you tried the HDMI or optical out?

The digital out is fantastic, these players have really great sound.
HDMI? If I get this paid off maybe a HDMI compatible receiver is next.
But on the 5.1 analog outs, no center or sub, puzzling, really.
Havew seen this on two players.
Btw my "crappy" Vizio can handle the 1080p out, but it looks like a
mescaline hangover, guess the scaler wasnt made for it:1:

kexodusc
07-29-2008, 03:44 AM
Nice grab, JSE...and yes it is easier to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission...:lol:

Rich-n-Texas
07-29-2008, 05:05 AM
Welcome to the club brotha! Since your using optical at the moment, rent yourself some BR with DTSMA tracks. Your only gonna get the "core" 1.5mbps for now but man it still sounds freakin' sweet! Fox has ALOT of DTSMA titles.
I would like to know how you find this information out BEFORE you rent/purchase Blu-ray titles. I just rented 6 titles but I have no idea whether or not they have lossless audio formats.:idea:

JSE
07-29-2008, 06:11 AM
Nice grab, JSE...and yes it is easier to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission...:lol:

Thanks Kex.

I also just bought a "slightly" expensive lens" for our upcoming vacation. It's on it's waty She does not know about it yet. Once I have begged for that forgiveness and if I can still breathing, maybe I can start working on the receiver.

BTW,

Just gave my coworker my free copy of Metal Gear 4 ( or something like that?) and you thought he had just won the lottery. You gamers are a weird bunch! :ciappa:

L.J.
07-29-2008, 06:39 AM
I would like to know how you find this information out BEFORE you rent/purchase Blu-ray titles. I just rented 6 titles but I have no idea whether or not they have lossless audio formats.:idea:

You can try out a review site that lists the info. I like DVDTalk & Hidefdigest. Usually the track info is announced before the release. Most new releases are gonna have a HD track of some form, though I still bump into a 640 DD every now and then.

Now if you really want to get some serious title info, peep this out (http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=3338).

L.J.
07-29-2008, 06:45 AM
Thanks Kex.

I also just bought a "slightly" expensive lens" for our upcoming vacation. It's on it's waty She does not know about it yet. Once I have begged for that forgiveness and if I can still breathing, maybe I can start working on the receiver.

Haha....The mysterious box at the door. I think were all guilty of that one. UPS, huh, wonder what they're doing here :p


BTW,

Just gave my coworker my free copy of Metal Gear 4 ( or something like that?) and you thought he had just won the lottery. You gamers are a weird bunch! :ciappa:

Hey, what about LJ :arf:

GMichael
07-29-2008, 07:44 AM
Haha....The mysterious box at the door. I think were all guilty of that one. UPS, huh, wonder what they're doing here :p



Hey, what about LJ :arf:

Isn't that what you did for your monster sub?

"Huh? What 200lb box?"

Rich-n-Texas
07-29-2008, 07:49 AM
You can try out a review site that lists the info. I like DVDTalk & Hidefdigest. Usually the track info is announced before the release. Most new releases are gonna have a HD track of some form, though I still bump into a 640 DD every now and then.

Now if you really want to get some serious title info, peep this out (http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=3338).
Thanks. I'll check those sites out.

Well, I just learned on that Blu-ray discussion you linked that Cloverfield's audio bitrate is above 4Mb/s, which is waaaaay above anything I've listened to so far on my equipment. It's in my queue but when I actually receive it is another story. I also like the sound of that scan tool they talk about the will allow you to see the actual bit rate of any disk you check. http://www.cinemasquid.com/Tools.aspx and it's free to install on your computer.

L.J.
07-29-2008, 08:30 AM
Thanks. I'll check those sites out.

Well, I just learned on that Blu-ray discussion you linked that Cloverfield's audio bitrate is above 4Mb/s, which is waaaaay above anything I've listened to so far on my equipment. It's in my queue but when I actually receive it is another story. I also like the sound of that scan tool they talk about the will allow you to see the actual bit rate of any disk you check. http://www.cinemasquid.com/Tools.aspx and it's free to install on your computer.

Yes, Cloverfield has a niiiccceee track. TrueHD I think.

Dude, you can get the actual bitrate info on the PS3. Just hit display while the disc is playing. It'll tell you what it's decoding, audio/video bitrate and time info :thumbsup:

Rich-n-Texas
07-29-2008, 09:46 AM
Yes, Cloverfield has a niiiccceee track. TrueHD I think.

Dude, you can get the actual bitrate info on the PS3. Just hit display while the disc is playing. It'll tell you what it's decoding, audio/video bitrate and time info :thumbsup:
Understood. I'd just like to know this before I rent one, certainly before I buy one.
Or... maybe I should just bookmark DVDTalk! :idea: DUH!!!

L.J.
07-29-2008, 05:23 PM
Isn't that what you did for your monster sub?

"Huh? What 200lb box?"

Yeah then you gotta walk to the door while holding a straight face.

O yeah, I forgot I ordered this. Honey, didn't I tell ya this was coming :p

L.J.
07-29-2008, 05:28 PM
Understood. I'd just like to know this before I rent one, certainly before I buy one.
Or... maybe I should just bookmark DVDTalk! :idea: DUH!!!

Yeah I pretty much read up on whatever I'm gonna rent. Highdefdigest is good about posting reviews and title info a week or so before release date.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates.html

pixelthis
07-29-2008, 11:45 PM
I would like to know how you find this information out BEFORE you rent/purchase Blu-ray titles. I just rented 6 titles but I have no idea whether or not they have lossless audio formats.:idea:


they hide that info on the back of the box:thumbsup:

And just about every title I have rented has dtsma, which is great, means they are going for quality sound.
My player has a bitmeter, says its for video, tho.
All of the other Sonys I have had have bitmeters for audio.
Guess they want to show off blus 20 to 41 (and up) bitrate.
Casino Royale hit 42 at one point.:1:

Rich-n-Texas
07-30-2008, 03:41 AM
they hide that info on the back of the box:thumbsup:
Yeah, and the make the text so tiny I can't even read it w/o a magnifying glass. :mad5:


And just about every title I have rented has dtsma, which is great, means they are going for quality sound.
My player has a bitmeter, says its for video, tho.
All of the other Sonys I have had have bitmeters for audio.
Guess they want to show off blus 20 to 41 (and up) bitrate.
Casino Royale hit 42 at one point.:1:
While watching MiB last night, I was able to display all sorts of video playback and audio info during the movie which is pretty slick. Bad thing is, I get no Dolby TrueHD light (or any indication whatsoever) that my receiver is seeing a lossless format.

kexodusc
07-30-2008, 04:29 AM
they hide that info on the back of the box:thumbsup:

And just about every title I have rented has dtsma, which is great, means they are going for quality sound.
My player has a bitmeter, says its for video, tho.
All of the other Sonys I have had have bitmeters for audio.
Guess they want to show off blus 20 to 41 (and up) bitrate.
Casino Royale hit 42 at one point.:1:
Looks like you stumbled into a nice piece of gear.! :thumbsup:

Have you been able to compare the higher bit-rate DTS or Dolby audio files with any standard DVD audio tracks with the lower bitrates? I'm curious to know how significant the higher bitrate improvement is on these old formats. I know with some audio files, mp3, wma, .ogg etc, after a certain bit rate, improvements are almost inaudible but file size increases dramatically. IE, 192 mp3's sound nearly identical to 320 kbps, and of course neither are as good as lossless FLAC. But the difference between 128 kpbs and 192 kpbs is huge. Just curious if you could make a comparison here?

I'll be living on core DTS or whatever for awile until I find a new receiver or processor I like with HDMI. Then I can go lossless.

I was in BB looking at some Sony and Samsung stand alones and the PS3. I would say each had its advantages in terms of picture quality and picking a clear winner was virtually impossible. I didn't try any DVD's though. This was in a light controlled environment on a reasonably calibrated set not running torch mode too. I like the idea of analog outs on the Sony/Samsung players, but processing power of the PS3 is more than those two combined. Given the price and the multimedia/streaming/web browsing capabilities of the PS3 I need someone to talk me out of going that route.

JSE
07-30-2008, 05:09 AM
I was in BB looking at some Sony and Samsung stand alones and the PS3. I would say each had its advantages in terms of picture quality and picking a clear winner was virtually impossible. I didn't try any DVD's though. This was in a light controlled environment on a reasonably calibrated set not running torch mode too. I like the idea of analog outs on the Sony/Samsung players, but processing power of the PS3 is more than those two combined. Given the price and the multimedia/streaming/web browsing capabilities of the PS3 I need someone to talk me out of going that route.

Watched BR Jumper last night. Decent flick but man the sound was much more impressive that my older DVD player that upscales. I know I am not getting true HD sound without the HMDI receiver but man, this thing sounded great. I'm running audio via the optical cable to my receiver. Much "bigger" sound. Very impressed. My wife even commented on the better sound and we both were blown away by the full 1080p video.

I also thought about a standalone BR player but the PS3 seems to have won out in pretty much every category. I thought the PS3 would be harder to control since it's not primarily a BR player but that has not been an issue at all. The $25 Sony PS3 remote is very nice and set up was a breeze. Very easy to control. You just pop in a BR disk and the PS3 does the rest. Very nice. I am 100% satisfied with my purchase so far. I have not regreted going the PS3 route at all.

Thanks again for all the advise guys.

JSE

Rich-n-Texas
07-30-2008, 05:43 AM
Looks like you stumbled into a nice piece of gear.! :thumbsup:

Have you been able to compare the higher bit-rate DTS or Dolby audio files with any standard DVD audio tracks with the lower bitrates? I'm curious to know how significant the higher bitrate improvement is on these old formats. I know with some audio files, mp3, wma, .ogg etc, after a certain bit rate, improvements are almost inaudible but file size increases dramatically. IE, 192 mp3's sound nearly identical to 320 kbps, and of course neither are as good as lossless FLAC. But the difference between 128 kpbs and 192 kpbs is huge. Just curious if you could make a comparison here?
I haven't done a side-by-side yet, but I have a Cream concert DVD with a DTS 1.5Mbps track, 48KHz, which sounds awsome all things considered (read... my room acoustics), and last night's Dolby TrueHD track. The difference was clearly noticeable. I really felt more of a movie theater presence in my house. What I did do, during playback was to switch the PS3 from Linear PCM to Bitstream, which gave me more decode choices and none of them matched what I heard when in TrueHD mode. From what I've read so far though, YMMV from title to title.

I'll be living on core DTS or whatever for awile until I find a new receiver or processor I like with HDMI. Then I can go lossless.
I suspect you're waiting until you move to your new house before the serious auditions start?


I was in BB looking at some Sony and Samsung stand alones and the PS3. I would say each had its advantages in terms of picture quality and picking a clear winner was virtually impossible. I didn't try any DVD's though. This was in a light controlled environment on a reasonably calibrated set not running torch mode too. I like the idea of analog outs on the Sony/Samsung players, but processing power of the PS3 is more than those two combined. Given the price and the multimedia/streaming/web browsing capabilities of the PS3 I need someone to talk me out of going that route.
Talk you out of going the PS3 route? It won't be me. As L.J. and others have pointed out, this is much more than a BDP. I'm having an issue right now trying to start and/or install the game that came with my PS3, but I haven't even touched on the other capabilities of this system. The convenience of having the three features you stated above all in one box... in my living room... easily holds this method of HD delivery way above a stand-alone player, IMO.

GMichael
07-30-2008, 05:45 AM
Watched BR Jumper last night. Decent flick but man the sound was much more impressive that my older DVD player that upscales. I know I am not getting true HD sound without the HMDI receiver but man, this thing sounded great. I'm running audio via the optical cable to my receiver. Much "bigger" sound. Very impressed. My wife even commented on the better sound and we both were blown away by the full 1080p video.

I also thought about a standalone BR player but the PS3 seems to have won out in pretty much every category. I thought the PS3 would be harder to control since it's not primarily a BR player but that has not been an issue at all. The $25 Sony PS3 remote is very nice and set up was a breeze. Very easy to control. You just pop in a BR disk and the PS3 does the rest. Very nice. I am 100% satisfied with my purchase so far. I have not regreted going the PS3 route at all.

Thanks again for all the advise guys.

JSE

Cool. Glad you are liking it.
I enjoy mine as well, and look forward to the days of lossless audio and 1080p. Till then, optical out and 720p will do.

kexodusc
07-30-2008, 06:13 AM
I haven't done a side-by-side yet, but I have a Cream concert DVD with a DTS 1.5Mbps track, 48KHz, which sounds awsome all things considered (read... my room acoustics), and last night's Dolby TrueHD track. The difference was clearly noticeable. I really felt more of a movie theater presence in my house. What I did do, during playback was to switch the PS3 from Linear PCM to Bitstream, which gave me more decode choices and none of them matched what I heard when in TrueHD mode. From what I've read so far though, YMMV from title to title.
That's encouraging.


I suspect you're waiting until you move to your new house before the serious auditions start? Been doing lots of auditions - I'm weighing the pros and cons of using a receiver or just buying a mid-fi pre-pro and selling off my integrated. I've got some other hobbies I'd like to start again too. Finally ordered the 1080p projector last week though...



Talk you out of going the PS3 route? It won't be me. As L.J. and others have pointed out, this is much more than a BDP. I'm having an issue right now trying to start and/or install the game that came with my PS3, but I haven't even touched on the other capabilities of this system. The convenience of having the three features you stated above all in one box... in my living room... easily holds this method of HD delivery way above a stand-alone player, IMO.
Yeah, I'm strongly leaning that way - just doing my due diligence.

L.J.
07-30-2008, 06:28 AM
I went about 6/7 months using optical out on my PS3 before going HDMI and I noticed a nice improvement in sound over standard DVD/DTS. The 1.5mbps DTS tracks sounds really good. Something I had to live with while waiting for the PS3 DTSMA update.

L.J.
07-30-2008, 06:55 AM
Given the price and the multimedia/streaming/web browsing capabilities of the PS3 I need someone to talk me out of going that route.

http://www.mazeguy.net/sad/ziplip.gif

Rich-n-Texas
07-30-2008, 07:06 AM
I'm reading some posts on the AVS forums and apparently there's been a lot of debate and discussion as to whether or not a difference can be heard between a high bit-rate DTS track and a DTS-MA track, for instance. Some people fault the PS3 for not being able to output the lossless formats in a Bitstream, and others say the PS3 does the decoding with LPCM just fine and with great results. The question I have is... do the stand-alone players use Bitstream, PCM or do you have the option to use either/or?

Rich-n-Texas
07-30-2008, 07:28 AM
...Bad thing is, I get no Dolby TrueHD light (or any indication whatsoever) that my receiver is seeing a lossless format.

The DTS-HD MA light in those receivers really should be labeled, "Look at me! I have little patience and no sales resistance!
:confused:
Edit: I think this was covered in an LJ3 thread somewhere, huh?

L.J.
07-30-2008, 07:43 AM
I'm reading some posts on the AVS forums and apparently there's been a lot of debate and discussion as to whether or not a difference can be heard between a high bit-rate DTS track and a DTS-MA track, for instance.

Full bitrate 1.5m DTS sounds good. DTSMA sounds good.....Debate over :ihih:


Some people fault the PS3 for not being able to output the lossless formats in a Bitstream, and others say the PS3 does the decoding with LPCM just fine and with great results. The question I have is... do the stand-alone players use Bitstream, PCM or do you have the option to use either/or?

Bitstream or not, the decoding has to be done somewhere. It's not like your loosing anything if it's done in the player vs the AVR. Does the AVR has some super powers that allows it to pull more info from the disc? The info is decoded/converted to PCM and sent to the your AVR for bass management and all that good stuff. Bitstream is the same thing. The raw signal is sent to your AVR and it's decoded/converted to PCM for bass management and all that good stuff. Downside of bitstream is you loose audio for PIP and all that other "extra" stuff.

What's the big deal about seeing MPCM on there AVR display vs seeing TrueHD or DTSMA?

Rich-n-Texas
07-30-2008, 09:39 AM
That's encouraging.

Been doing lots of auditions - I'm weighing the pros and cons of using a receiver or just buying a mid-fi pre-pro and selling off my integrated. I've got some other hobbies I'd like to start again too. Finally ordered the 1080p projector last week though...
Thought you were going to slip this one by huh? CONGRATS!!! :thumbsup:
Watchya get watchya get???

GMichael
07-30-2008, 09:54 AM
Thought you were going to slip this one by huh? CONGRATS!!! :thumbsup:
Watchya get watchya get???

He did good!!!

bobsticks
07-30-2008, 10:04 AM
I'm looking forward to a vid of Kex in front of a massive screen doing Rock Band to In Flames

Chino Morena on crack...that one still makes me laugh.

pixelthis
07-30-2008, 09:52 PM
Looks like you stumbled into a nice piece of gear.! :thumbsup:

Have you been able to compare the higher bit-rate DTS or Dolby audio files with any standard DVD audio tracks with the lower bitrates? I'm curious to know how significant the higher bitrate improvement is on these old formats. I know with some audio files, mp3, wma, .ogg etc, after a certain bit rate, improvements are almost inaudible but file size increases dramatically. IE, 192 mp3's sound nearly identical to 320 kbps, and of course neither are as good as lossless FLAC. But the difference between 128 kpbs and 192 kpbs is huge. Just curious if you could make a comparison here?

I'll be living on core DTS or whatever for awile until I find a new receiver or processor I like with HDMI. Then I can go lossless.

I was in BB looking at some Sony and Samsung stand alones and the PS3. I would say each had its advantages in terms of picture quality and picking a clear winner was virtually impossible. I didn't try any DVD's though. This was in a light controlled environment on a reasonably calibrated set not running torch mode too. I like the idea of analog outs on the Sony/Samsung players, but processing power of the PS3 is more than those two combined. Given the price and the multimedia/streaming/web browsing capabilities of the PS3 I need someone to talk me out of going that route.

Nicer than I THOUGHT it would be, after hearing about slow load times,
crappy upconversion, I was worried, but after seeing it installed at my friends house....
Anyway the diff between DVD and blu is astonishing to say the least.
Not sure how this meter works, but the "worst" blu disc( before the devil knows you're dead clocked in at between 21 and thirty, mosty the low twenties.
Most have been in the mid to upper thirties, a few peaked in the fourties.
My collection of sheryl crow vids(with a lossless soundtrack and flawless pic) come in at between seven and eight.
Bedazzled, a minor classic, come in at four and a half and six
I have a high bitrate version of Charlies angels(who doesnt?)
and it gets the best results, the "high" bit translates out to 8 and 9 mbs,
which is half of devil, which is mostly a talkie.
However I must say that if you can find one of these and have an upconverter, (I think I saw one for five bucks) the picture, already
great in SD, is really fantastic, not so much the resolution(hich you wont get any more of) but the incredible color and amazing blacks I have noticed in the Blu format.
IN OTHER WORDS you dont get any extra res "upconverting" but you do seem to get a larger color palette and certainly much greater black
level, which makes the trip worthwhile.
BUT BEING BASICALLY A computer the same old axiome applies, garbage in, garbage out.
I HAD FORGOTTEN THO, just how low the bitrate was on DVD,
wish I had one on my digital cable box:1:

kexodusc
07-31-2008, 04:02 AM
I'm looking forward to a vid of Kex in front of a massive screen doing Rock Band to In Flames

Chino Morena on crack...that one still makes me laugh.
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=63068239

This is the jobber I got - these things are rare in stores, and there were only 2 1080p capable projectors I could demo with any frequency. An Optoma and Epson. For all intents and purposes I found them roughly equal in performance - that is neither had anything extra-special the other didn't have and both delivered great pictures...A few months back when I started looking around the Optoma was a bit cheaper, but things changed in July when I started really shopping - I got a better discount, warranty, free bulb and $300 mail-in rebate with the Epson so my frugal nature took over.

Now...looks like Aug 14 or so for a move-in date, so it's gonna be late August at best before I can play with it :(
House is coming along though...

GMichael
07-31-2008, 04:59 AM
Looking good Kex. When is the party?

JSE
07-31-2008, 05:49 AM
Now...looks like Aug 14 or so for a move-in date, so it's gonna be late August at best before I can play with it :(
House is coming along though...

Nice House Kex.

That's one hell of a sprinkler system you've got there in the back yard! :sosp: :p

JSE

GMichael
07-31-2008, 05:55 AM
Nice House Kex.

That's one hell of a sprinkler system you've got there in the back yard! :sosp: :p

JSE
That's going to be what we call here in PA, a "turkey mound." Not sure where that name came from.

kexodusc
07-31-2008, 05:56 AM
Nice House Kex.

That's one hell of a sprinkler system you've got there in the back yard! :sosp: :p

JSE
Sprinkler system? Those are port tubes for the subwoofer I built into the lower level...

JSE
07-31-2008, 06:21 AM
Sprinkler system? Those are port tubes for the subwoofer I built into the lower level...


Good Lordy! Don't tell the neighbors. Let them "experience" it first! :devil:

GMichael
07-31-2008, 06:28 AM
Don't let anyone flush while a movie is on. :yikes:

It could make a bit of a mess.:blush2:

kexodusc
07-31-2008, 06:48 AM
Good Lordy! Don't tell the neighbors. Let them "experience" it first! :devil:
They'll experience it as soon as I hit the "brown note" :hand:

bobsticks
07-31-2008, 07:00 AM
Lookin' good Kex. Fast too, it seems like just yesterday you were in the "talkin'"stages. Will the basement be the mancave, home of the projector and system?

BTW, make sure after sprinkler/subwoofer installation they add the deck. They forgot to on JSE's abode which is, in truth, how he hurt his knees. Nasty fall that, tennis injury may ass...

kexodusc
07-31-2008, 08:58 AM
Lookin' good Kex. Fast too, it seems like just yesterday you were in the "talkin'"stages. Will the basement be the mancave, home of the projector and system?

BTW, make sure after sprinkler/subwoofer installation they add the deck. They forgot to on JSE's abode which is, in truth, how he hurt his knees. Nasty fall that, tennis injury may ass...
Thanks BS! (...mwa ha ha ha)

Yeah the deck's on the menu for sure. Nothing too big since we can't use it 5 months of the year but I think it's a 14' x 18' piece.

Here in Canada it seems a lot more homes finish off the basement as a 2nd floor, rather than build 2 stories or large slabs. I haven't lived in every state but from what I can recall about ND, GA, and ME, that was more of an exception than the rule - think the winters have something to do with building down instead of up. So we've completed the basement with a few bedrooms and yes, my 16' x 19' mancave for the projector.

With the Olympics on my mind I'm having a local guy rig up a sign for me -
"This screen dims for no earthly king"

Doesn't take these guys long, that's for sure. After all the time it took me to do the renos on my last house I feel so unaccomplished.

L.J.
07-31-2008, 10:25 AM
Lookin' good Kex.......So I'm assuming your having a BIG AR partay once your all finished huh :yesnod:

kexodusc
07-31-2008, 10:39 AM
Lookin' good Kex.......So I'm assuming your having a BIG AR partay once your all finished huh :yesnod:
I dunno, I've seen the mess you guys leave at AR partays :biggrin5:

I know that's not gonna stop you though.

Groundbeef
07-31-2008, 11:09 AM
Hey, nice looking house.

My wife and I built about 6 years ago (In August). About the only advice I can give you is to visit the site OFTEN. Preferably when there are workers present. The reasons are:

1. Make sure you are getting what you specified. I discovered our plumber had installed one (1) 50gal water heater. Our plans called for two (2) 40 gallon heaters. Had I not been keeping an eye on on it, it could have been a disaster. The gas out (vent) as installed was too small for 2 heaters. Luckilly the drywall wasn't up so they just tore out the 3" pipe and put in 5"pipe. I have 3 daughters and a wife, hence the dual heaters. Inline heating was too expensive.

2. Keeps the workers to a mininium of "shortcuts". If you don't like or understand what they are doing ask. Remember, ITS YOUR HOUSE.

3. Do walk throughs with the subcontractors. If you don't like something, make them fix it BEFORE they get their draw. Also, make sure that all wires are run to all rooms. Even if you don't think you will need a phone in each bedroom, the next owner might! We bought our first house, and it had 2 (TWO) Phone jacks in the entire house! They probably saved $50?

4. I don't know about Canada, but get LIEN WAIVERS from the subs as well. Basically this says that "Yes, we HAVE been paid". Without a doubt you are dealing with a 100% honest contractor, but if they don't pay the subs, they can later sue you, and hold your home hostage. In effect you will be paying them twice!

5. Have fun.

GMichael
07-31-2008, 11:22 AM
Hey, nice looking house.

My wife and I built about 6 years ago (In August). About the only advice I can give you is to visit the site OFTEN. Preferably when there are workers present. The reasons are:

1. Make sure you are getting what you specified. I discovered our plumber had installed one (1) 50gal water heater. Our plans called for two (2) 40 gallon heaters. Had I not been keeping an eye on on it, it could have been a disaster. The gas out (vent) as installed was too small for 2 heaters. Luckilly the drywall wasn't up so they just tore out the 3" pipe and put in 5"pipe. I have 3 daughters and a wife, hence the dual heaters. Inline heating was too expensive.

2. Keeps the workers to a mininium of "shortcuts". If you don't like or understand what they are doing ask. Remember, ITS YOUR HOUSE.

3. Do walk throughs with the subcontractors. If you don't like something, make them fix it BEFORE they get their draw. Also, make sure that all wires are run to all rooms. Even if you don't think you will need a phone in each bedroom, the next owner might! We bought our first house, and it had 2 (TWO) Phone jacks in the entire house! They probably saved $50?

4. I don't know about Canada, but get LIEN WAIVERS from the subs as well. Basically this says that "Yes, we HAVE been paid". Without a doubt you are dealing with a 100% honest contractor, but if they don't pay the subs, they can later sue you, and hold your home hostage. In effect you will be paying them twice!

5. Have fun.

Amen...

kexodusc
07-31-2008, 11:39 AM
Pains me to say it, but I've heard it all before from many other people, which tells me these are all too common issues.

We ended up doing a turn-key arrangement with a 6 page schedule in the contract of construction specifics, instead of typical progress draws - every stupid little detail we could think of - the laws here state we can sue for specific performance if he doesn't satisfy the terms or code if we've omitted it. That said, I'm sure we didn't capture everything, but it's generally the preferred method up here.

Good call on the Lien waivers too - we had some advice before hand and demanded that as well. Actually, most of the banks we talked to wouldn't fund a mortgage without these. Seems like it's becoming standard practice now - which tells me that post-sale lien suits were happening too often.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
07-31-2008, 12:16 PM
K-Swiss...Classics :3:

K-swiss classic...I love'em!!

Groundbeef
07-31-2008, 01:48 PM
Pains me to say it, but I've heard it all before from many other people, which tells me these are all too common issues.

We ended up doing a turn-key arrangement with a 6 page schedule in the contract of construction specifics, instead of typical progress draws - every stupid little detail we could think of - the laws here state we can sue for specific performance if he doesn't satisfy the terms or code if we've omitted it. That said, I'm sure we didn't capture everything, but it's generally the preferred method up here.

Good call on the Lien waivers too - we had some advice before hand and demanded that as well. Actually, most of the banks we talked to wouldn't fund a mortgage without these. Seems like it's becoming standard practice now - which tells me that post-sale lien suits were happening too often.

The law is all well and good. However, I'm more of the "Fix it before it's a problem" rather than the "I'll sue you after the job is done" kinda guy.

For example, if the water heater issue hadn't been done, it could have been a $5000 mistake, not a 1 day labor mistake for the sub. Everyone was happy. And the job was done correctly.

And the lien waivers are for YOUR protection. I don't worry about the bank (they do that pretty well!!!). The issue is after the title is drawn up and filed, then the subs go in and "sue" for unpaid wages/labor. Without a Lien Waiver, it is VERY difficult to prove if/when the sub was paid.

It can be a hassle, but well worth it.

(Full disclosure here...I was personal friends with the builder, and had sold him material for 8 years prior to hiring him. I wasn't very concerned about them, and 80% of his work was done in house vs subs. But the bank did get lien waivers, and I signed off on all draws.)

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-03-2008, 11:34 AM
I'm reading some posts on the AVS forums and apparently there's been a lot of debate and discussion as to whether or not a difference can be heard between a high bit-rate DTS track and a DTS-MA track, for instance. Some people fault the PS3 for not being able to output the lossless formats in a Bitstream, and others say the PS3 does the decoding with LPCM just fine and with great results. The question I have is... do the stand-alone players use Bitstream, PCM or do you have the option to use either/or?

First, AVS is not what it used to be. The brains abandon that site during the bluray/HD DVD format war. The rest of the folks are cool, but they are wanna bee smart guys.

I found out from Paidgeek that the PS3's decoding of Dtsma and DTHD is probably going to be the best decoding with the lowest noise and distortion than you are going to hear until the specialty audio company's get into the bluray game. Since it has no chipsets for decoding (its all software driven), it is not bound by the resolution within the format decoding and D/A chipsets offered in other players and receivers.

I have heard Dtsma streamed to my pre-pro, and decoding directly from my player. I could not hear any difference between the two even during single blind, level match comparisons. If you do bitstream, you lose the audio on all of your extra's, and forget the audio on any BD live content you download with the movie. There is absolutely no advantage to bitstreaming, zero, nigh. The only reason why the AVS'ers go for bitstreaming is because they are stuck in the past with DVD audio decoding, and they like to see their little receivers display read Dtsma 3/2/1. These are the only reasons, as there are no audio benefit based ones.

Rich-n-Texas
08-03-2008, 01:51 PM
First, AVS is not what it used to be. The brains abandon that site during the bluray/HD DVD format war. The rest of the folks are cool, but they are wanna bee smart guys.
A subtle plug for the Blu-ray.com forums I'd suspect. :p I guess it's time to join & learn...

I found out from Paidgeek that the PS3's decoding of Dtsma and DTHD is probably going to be the best decoding with the lowest noise and distortion than you are going to hear until the specialty audio company's get into the bluray game. Since it has no chipsets for decoding (its all software driven), it is not bound by the resolution within the format decoding and D/A chipsets offered in other players and receivers.
So that puts us PS owners ahead in the audio format ballgame, yes? :thumbsup:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-03-2008, 09:07 PM
A subtle plug for the Blu-ray.com forums I'd suspect. :p I guess it's time to join & learn...

I think LJ is doing a damn good job of keeping us informed and educated right here, but it wouldn't hurt, because they're alot of guys there who know alot about the PS3.


So that puts us PS owners ahead in the audio format ballgame, yes? :thumbsup:
According to Paidgeek, pretty dang far ahead until companies like Classe, Meridian, or Krell get into the game. Even CD playback is better through the PS3 than any other bluray player.

pixelthis
08-03-2008, 09:33 PM
A subtle plug for the Blu-ray.com forums I'd suspect. :p I guess it's time to join & learn...

So that puts us PS owners ahead in the audio format ballgame, yes? :thumbsup:

NOT REALLY.
Panny handles both formats, and my player passes it through after the latest firmware upgrade.
Not that it matters, a german shepard would have a hard time distingushing between the formats.
AND SIR TALKY IS THE ONE STUCK IN THE PAST, so "bitstreaming"
is passe? What do you think passes through a HDMI cable?.
Anyway the DD coming through my coax souonds so much better than a run of the mill DVD player, my friend, who now has a Samsung,
has always said that the sound is just as (if not more) impressive than
the picture.
The latest pleasant surprize, BTW, is the Carlos Santana DVD, ITS
reletively high PQ stands out well when shot from a Blu player, and teh DTS soundtrack is superb.
Now wheres that Steely Dan Two against nature dvd?...:1:

Rich-n-Texas
08-04-2008, 05:17 AM
I think LJ is doing a damn good job of keeping us informed and educated right here, but it wouldn't hurt, because they're alot of guys there who know alot about the PS3.
Absolutely L.J.'s doing a good job; I'm not trying to detract from his efforts. Let's keep that Blu-ray industry & technology info coming! :thumbsup:



According to Paidgeek, pretty dang far ahead until companies like Classe, Meridian, or Krell get into the game. Even CD playback is better through the PS3 than any other bluray player.
I'm getting myself familiar with this Paidgeek person. Seem's he has quite a history over on AVS. I read the "Paidgeek Appreciation Thread" which got locked almost a year ago, but it was mentioned that he always took the high road when attacked by the HDDVD camp, and that he was very helpful to that community. I would've liked to have seen how some of the BD vs HDDVD conversations evolved as it started to become clear that BD was to be the winner. (Of course we had Wooch over here to document HDDVD's demise).

Rich-n-Texas
08-04-2008, 05:39 AM
NOT REALLY.
Panny handles both formats, and my player passes it through after the latest firmware upgrade.
So now starts a new flame war right pix?

Didn't you say your new player wasn't passing the LFE & CC info?

Not that it matters, a german shepard would have a hard time distingushing between the formats.
:Yawn:

AND SIR TALKY IS THE ONE STUCK IN THE PAST, so "bitstreaming"
is passe? What do you think passes through a HDMI cable?.
One's and zero's

The latest pleasant surprize, BTW, is the Carlos Santana DVD, ITS
reletively high PQ stands out well when shot from a Blu player, and teh DTS soundtrack is superb.
Now wheres that Steely Dan Two against nature dvd?...:1:
Let's have the EXACT name of the Santana DVD please!

L.J.
08-04-2008, 06:54 AM
The only reason why the AVS'ers go for bitstreaming is because they are stuck in the past with DVD audio decoding, and they like to see their little receivers display read Dtsma 3/2/1. These are the only reasons, as there are no audio benefit based ones.

I was completely shocked to see how many people were selling off HDMI 1.1 & 1.2 AVRs to get the new 1.3 Onkyos when they first came out. They were using the PS3 as the BR player!! Talkin' about just throwing your money out before doing any kind of research.

I think there's a lot of useful info over there though. Problem is that you gotta dig since the threads are so massive. I don't got time for all that.

GMichael
08-04-2008, 07:07 AM
I was completely shocked to see how many people were selling off HDMI 1.1 & 1.2 AVRs to get the new 1.3 Onkyos when they first came out. They were using the PS3 as the BR player!! Talkin' about just throwing your money out before doing any kind of research.

I think there's a lot of useful info over there though. Problem is that you gotta dig since the threads are so massive. I don't got time for all that.


Us either. That's why we have been letting you do all the research. We are very appreciative of you coming here and spelling it all out for us. Beats the heck out of reading 10,000 posts over at AVS, just to find out that we need to be on a different thread.
I personaly thank you for all the time you have saved me.:thumbsup:

Rich-n-Texas
08-04-2008, 09:22 AM
GM is correct... on all points.

I think I've only once or twice gotten the answer I was looking for in the huge threads on AVS. IMO it's impossible to read most of them from start to finish. A forum I used to frequent would lock the thread after 100 posts and start a new one as a continuation of the locked one.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-04-2008, 12:52 PM
NOT REALLY.
Panny handles both formats, and my player passes it through after the latest firmware upgrade.
Not that it matters, a german shepard would have a hard time distingushing between the formats.
AND SIR TALKY IS THE ONE STUCK IN THE PAST, so "bitstreaming"
is passe? What do you think passes through a HDMI cable?.
Anyway the DD coming through my coax souonds so much better than a run of the mill DVD player, my friend, who now has a Samsung,
has always said that the sound is just as (if not more) impressive than
the picture.
The latest pleasant surprize, BTW, is the Carlos Santana DVD, ITS
reletively high PQ stands out well when shot from a Blu player, and teh DTS soundtrack is superb.
Now wheres that Steely Dan Two against nature dvd?...:1:

You have proven once again you are the boards stupid idiot. When the player does the decoding, you are getting a raw PCM signal with no control information or metadata. That is not called bitstreaming, and that is what is passing through the HDMI cable when the player does the decoding. When the receiver is doing the decoding, you are passing a Dtsma, DtsHD, DD+ and Dolby TrueHD bitstream complete with metadata and control information that the receiver needs to decode the signals. Raw PCM and the advance audio codecs are very different animals. One contains all the zero and ones intact, the other a lossless compressed signal void of any zero's until the decoder decompresses the signal at the decoding stage, which then the zero's are added back in.

That is what is traveling through the HDMI cable.

Secondly idiot, a german shepherd is not required to tell the differences between formats since there is no extended highs that humans cannot hear in the signal. If you analyze the frequency content of a typical soundtrack, you will find very little audible information at, or over 20khz. So you don't need dog ears to detect audible differences, you just need to level match, have the right equipment, and at the least have a single blind comparison.

Stay with the conversation, we are not talking about your coaxial inputs. Also DD or Dts through the coaxial outputs of a bluray player does not sound any different than it does through the coaxial outputs of a DVD player. Core Dts is core Dts, legacy DD is legacy DD. There is nothing different happening to the lossy audio(cause that is what is being output through coaxial outputs) coming from either player. The stream is the same, the legacy decoders are the same, even the data rate is the same. I think you are suffering from a spin on the Temptations as this is "Just your imagination".

Rich-n-Texas
08-04-2008, 05:58 PM
I just saved the above as a Word doc. Good stuff T! :thumbsup:

L.J.
08-04-2008, 06:52 PM
Yeah, good stuff.

BTW, thank for the luv fellas :)

Rich-n-Texas
08-05-2008, 10:47 AM
I should probably know the answer to this but, will an Aspect Ratio of 1.78:1 fill my entire screen? I'm thinking about buying the Blu-ray version of "Planet Earth - The Complete BBC series" which is displayed with that ratio. It's a five-disk set, not cheap, but I don't want to look at ANY black bars! :nonod:

L.J.
08-05-2008, 12:13 PM
I should probably know the answer to this but, will an Aspect Ratio of 1.78:1 fill my entire screen? I'm thinking about buying the Blu-ray version of "Planet Earth - The Complete BBC series" which is displayed with that ratio. It's a five-disk set, not cheap, but I don't want to look at ANY black bars! :nonod:

Yeah your OK. Planet Earth BR is a must have!!!!! :thumbsup:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-05-2008, 03:03 PM
I do not know if this has been mentioned here(I posted this in the other thread as well), but I stumbled on to a way to drastically improve the PS3 PQ with DVD's, to the point where it is better than any of the HD DVD players out there(this was HD DVD big marketing point).

Insert a DVD and press play. When the movie starts, press the triangle (options), and a menu comes up. Look for AV settings, and you will see these groups of filters called Mosquito noise filter, Block noise filter, and frame noise reduction. Turn them all to three, and see if you notice any PQ improvement on your DVD's. I personally was shocked at the difference between having them off, and have them on full. When I compared the mummy DVD on my XA-2 with the Reon chip to the PS3 both running split screen, and running frame by frame together via digital timecode. I could not tell any difference between the two no matter how hard I looked.

If the DVD is already done well, you will probably see no improvement. If the DVD has alot of mosquito noise, or video noise, the more the disc has, the better improvement you will see. This is just my experience, yours may differ.

My name is Sir T, and I approve this message........

pixelthis
08-06-2008, 12:16 AM
You have proven once again you are the boards stupid idiot. When the player does the decoding, you are getting a raw PCM signal with no control information or metadata. That is not called bitstreaming, and that is what is passing through the HDMI cable when the player does the decoding. When the receiver is doing the decoding, you are passing a Dtsma, DtsHD, DD+ and Dolby TrueHD bitstream complete with metadata and control information that the receiver needs to decode the signals. Raw PCM and the advance audio codecs are very different animals. One contains all the zero and ones intact, the other a lossless compressed signal void of any zero's until the decoder decompresses the signal at the decoding stage, which then the zero's are added back in.

That is what is traveling through the HDMI cable.

Secondly idiot, a german shepherd is not required to tell the differences between formats since there is no extended highs that humans cannot hear in the signal. If you analyze the frequency content of a typical soundtrack, you will find very little audible information at, or over 20khz. So you don't need dog ears to detect audible differences, you just need to level match, have the right equipment, and at the least have a single blind comparison.

Stay with the conversation, we are not talking about your coaxial inputs. Also DD or Dts through the coaxial outputs of a bluray player does not sound any different than it does through the coaxial outputs of a DVD player. Core Dts is core Dts, legacy DD is legacy DD. There is nothing different happening to the lossy audio(cause that is what is being output through coaxial outputs) coming from either player. The stream is the same, the legacy decoders are the same, even the data rate is the same. I think you are suffering from a spin on the Temptations as this is "Just your imagination".


NONE OF THIS BS means anything, semantics, really.
The two new audio codecs are DIGITAL, until decoded by a receiver,
ones and zeros.
And yes, the sound coming from a Blu player sounds great, better than any I have ever heard, the bit rate is higher, (sometimes up to nine).
And yes my player wont output center or sub on the 5.1, but the rest sounds great, but its probably going back.
And thanks for proving mypoint nimrod, teh difference between most modern codecs is so little that a GERMAN SHERPARD couldnt tell teh difference.
And the DVD is Santana's HBO concert, with Dave mathews, etc, with
songs from his supernatural album.
Its a must have, you'll like it, its LOUD.
THE MAIN DEAL I like on my system is concerts, music videos, etc,
movies are great, but theres nothing like a music DVD
as for you sir talky:1:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-06-2008, 08:05 AM
NONE OF THIS BS means anything, semantics, really.
The two new audio codecs are DIGITAL, until decoded by a receiver,
ones and zeros.

Wrong stupid. They are quite different. The advance audio codecs signals travel in a packet stream, completely void of all zeros, and loaded with metadata information. It also is variable bit stream as opposed to a constant bitstream. PCM is all of the ones and zero's that represent the voltage swing, is a constant data stream, has no metadata and no need to decode it. So the differences are more than just semantics if you have the intelligence to understand both processes. You apparently don't.


And yes, the sound coming from a Blu player sounds great, better than any I have ever heard, the bit rate is higher, (sometimes up to nine).

False again. There is absolutely no audio encoding that goes up to nine on DVD.The maxium allowance for audio data on DVD is 2mbps. The highest data rate that DD can have on DVD is 448kbps constant bit rate, and with Dts its 1.5mbps constant bit rate, and there are no provisions for a higher bit rate for either codec on DVD. In over 2500 DVD's, I have never seen the total data rate of the audio go over 2mbps EVER. Considering that you only have 10mbps for both audio and video on DVD, you claims of up to nine is bullcrap. I think you are talking about the video bit rate, and the fact that you cannot tell the differences between the two is pretty telling.


And yes my player wont output center or sub on the 5.1, but the rest sounds great, but its probably going back.

And thanks for proving mypoint nimrod, teh difference between most modern codecs is so little that a GERMAN SHERPARD couldnt tell teh difference.
And the DVD is Santana's HBO concert, with Dave mathews, etc, with
songs from his supernatural album.
Its a must have, you'll like it, its LOUD.
THE MAIN DEAL I like on my system is concerts, music videos, etc,
movies are great, but theres nothing like a music DVD
as for you sir talky:1:

There is no modern codecs on DVD stupid idiot, its just legacy Dts and DD. Pixel, once again you have proven you do not know your azz from a whole in the ground when it comes to audio and video. You are attempting to gloss over what you don't know to create an illusion that you are knowledgeable. You are not fooling anyone but yourself old guy.

Rich-n-Texas
08-06-2008, 09:58 AM
And thanks for proving mypoint nimrod,

Wrong stupid
I guess sometimes it depends on my mood, but today anyway I'm lovin' this stuff. :lol:

The highest data rate that DD can have on DVD is 448kbps constant bit rate, and with Dts its 1.5mbps constant bit rate, and there are no provisions for a higher bit rate for either codec on DVD.
I'm able to choose DD 640kbps on my Pink Floyd "Pulse" DVD; my PS3 verifies that, but I don't know if that's constant or variable.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-06-2008, 10:43 AM
I guess sometimes it depends on my mood, but today anyway I'm lovin' this stuff. :lol:

I'm able to choose DD 640kbps on my Pink Floyd "Pulse" DVD; my PS3 verifies that, but I don't know if that's constant or variable.

640kbps is the maximum data rate for DD, and you may find a few music video releases that include it. Music videos do not always follow spec, and there really is nothing technically that keeps them from using 640kbps. However, you are not going to find a single movie out there with a 640kbps because A) it would take up too much space on the disc and B) the DVD forum has put a cap on the data rate at 448kbps for movies.

Its constant bit rate as no lossy codec on DVD is variable.

pixelthis
08-07-2008, 12:22 AM
[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]Wrong stupid. They are quite different. The advance audio codecs signals travel in a packet stream, completely void of all zeros, and loaded with metadata information. It also is variable bit stream as opposed to a constant bitstream. PCM is all of the ones and zero's that represent the voltage swing, is a constant data stream, has no metadata and no need to decode it. So the differences are more than just semantics if you have the intelligence to understand both processes. You apparently don't.

Its still a bit stream, you silly ninny, and all "bitstreams" are variable, and the "zeros" in computer language is a bit different than
the zero between your ears


False again. There is absolutely no audio encoding that goes up to nine on DVD.The maxium allowance for audio data on DVD is 2mbps. The highest data rate that DD can have on DVD is 448kbps constant bit rate, and with Dts its 1.5mbps constant bit rate, and there are no provisions for a higher bit rate for either codec on DVD. In over 2500 DVD's, I have never seen the total data rate of the audio go over 2mbps EVER. Considering that you only have 10mbps for both audio and video on DVD, you claims of up to nine is bullcrap. I think you are talking about the video bit rate, and the fact that you cannot tell the differences between the two is pretty telling.

Actually DD can go up to 750 kbs, and the DTS is almost double that,
except that they made it into a marketing gimmick and never
used the full amount available.
And of course the level I AM READING IS BOTH SOUND AND VISION,
and runs about a meg higher than when I HAD A Sony dvd player,
when most DVD's ran about 7 to 8.


There is no modern codecs on DVD stupid idiot, its just legacy Dts and DD. Pixel, once again you have proven you do not know your azz from a whole in the ground when it comes to audio and video. You are attempting to gloss over what you don't know to create an illusion that you are knowledgeable. You are not fooling anyone but yourself old guy.
DD and DTS are anything but "legacy", unless you want to call something that is still in use by millions of DVD's and their players "legacy".
Both have a lot of life left in them, and both blu players I HAVE HEARD decode them with great sound the result.
Arent you supposed to be selling these players, shill?
What a maroon:1:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-07-2008, 08:56 AM
[QUOTE]

Its still a bit stream, you silly ninny, and all "bitstreams" are variable, and the "zeros" in computer language is a bit different than
the zero between your ears

Wrong again idiot. Dolby Digital and Dts core are constant bit rate, not variable. Dts HD and DD+ are constant bit rate, not variable. Only the advance lossless audio codecs are variable. PCM is not a bit stream, as it is not decoded into a file like all Dts and DD codecs are, that is why the word bit streaming is not associated with PCM. The only variable bit rate component of DVD video is the video bit rate itself.



Actually DD can go up to 750 kbs, and the DTS is almost double that,
except that they made it into a marketing gimmick and never
used the full amount available.

This is why you get called a liar, you just make $hit up in your head and spew it out. The maximum bit rate for Dolby Digital has always been 640kbps, though the DVD forum has put the cap at 448kbps for DVD(any DVD with a 640kbps track is out of spec, but still playable). Dolby digital for film is capped at 320kbps, for video it comes in two flavors 384kbps on laserdisc and 448kbps on DVD. DD has never supported a 750kbps data rate, so just admit you don't know what you are talking about dumb a$$

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_Digital

Dts core can use any bit rate between 384kbps and 1.5mbps but the typical bit rate are 754kbps and 1509kbps on DVD, 768kbps and 1536kbps on laserdisc, and 1103kbps for film.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Theater_System

This is the second time you have either gotten your information incorrect, or you glossed over the detail. Rather than just being pig headed and stupid, just admit you haven't a clue about what you are talking about, you are just talking.


And of course the level I AM READING IS BOTH SOUND AND VISION,
and runs about a meg higher than when I HAD A Sony dvd player,
when most DVD's ran about 7 to 8.

Sorry, but bit rates of audio and video do not change with players. The bit rate is a function of the program material on disc, not the player. The video bitrate does not run higher or lower depending on the player it is played in. It has NEVER worked that way.



DD and DTS are anything but "legacy", unless you want to call something that is still in use by millions of DVD's and their players "legacy".
Both have a lot of life left in them, and both blu players I HAVE HEARD decode them with great sound the result.
Arent you supposed to be selling these players, shill?
What a maroon:1:

Not only are you informationally vacant on audio codecs, but the understanding of the english language is also a problem for you.

Legacy-of or pertaining to old or outdated computer hardware, software, or data that, while still functional, does not work well with up-to-date systems.

anything handed down from the past, as from an ancestor or predecessor: the legacy of ancient Rome.

Dts core has been replaced by Dts MA Lossless. There is no need for Dts like it is presented on DVD. Now on bluray Dts MA Lossless can provide all of Dts audio in a single bitstream. If your player cannot decode the lossless audio, it will revert to the core audio instead. This is why Dts on DVD is called legacy, because it was replaced by something else that does a better job on a new format.

Dolby Digital as seen on DVD is no longer needed, but still can be used to encode alternate languages, and still provide decent audio on the bluray format. For primary audio we have moved on to DD+ and Dolby TrueHD, as we are no longer limited to the 448kbps data rate on DVD. Hence why Dolby Digital is called a legacy codec, it has been replaced on bluray with something else more effective on the format.

And no stupid azz, I do not sell players. Do you still clean toilets? Perhaps the fumes from the cleaners you use have rotted your already useless cheese ball of a brain.

pixelthis
08-08-2008, 12:24 AM
[QUOTE=pixelthis]

Wrong again idiot. Dolby Digital and Dts core are constant bit rate, not variable. Dts HD and DD+ are constant bit rate, not variable. Only the advance lossless audio codecs are variable. PCM is not a bit stream, as it is not decoded into a file like all Dts and DD codecs are, that is why the word bit streaming is not associated with PCM. The only variable bit rate component of DVD video is the video bit rate itself.




This is why you get called a liar, you just make $hit up in your head and spew it out. The maximum bit rate for Dolby Digital has always been 640kbps, though the DVD forum has put the cap at 448kbps for DVD(any DVD with a 640kbps track is out of spec, but still playable). Dolby digital for film is capped at 320kbps, for video it comes in two flavors 384kbps on laserdisc and 448kbps on DVD. DD has never supported a 750kbps data rate, so just admit you don't know what you are talking about dumb a$$

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_Digital

Dts core can use any bit rate between 384kbps and 1.5mbps but the typical bit rate are 754kbps and 1509kbps on DVD, 768kbps and 1536kbps on laserdisc, and 1103kbps for film.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Theater_System

This is the second time you have either gotten your information incorrect, or you glossed over the detail. Rather than just being pig headed and stupid, just admit you haven't a clue about what you are talking about, you are just talking.



Sorry, but bit rates of audio and video do not change with players. The bit rate is a function of the program material on disc, not the player. The video bitrate does not run higher or lower depending on the player it is played in. It has NEVER worked that way.




Not only are you informationally vacant on audio codecs, but the understanding of the english language is also a problem for you.

Legacy-of or pertaining to old or outdated computer hardware, software, or data that, while still functional, does not work well with up-to-date systems.

anything handed down from the past, as from an ancestor or predecessor: the legacy of ancient Rome.

Dts core has been replaced by Dts MA Lossless. There is no need for Dts like it is presented on DVD. Now on bluray Dts MA Lossless can provide all of Dts audio in a single bitstream. If your player cannot decode the lossless audio, it will revert to the core audio instead. This is why Dts on DVD is called legacy, because it was replaced by something else that does a better job on a new format.

Dolby Digital as seen on DVD is no longer needed, but still can be used to encode alternate languages, and still provide decent audio on the bluray format. For primary audio we have moved on to DD+ and Dolby TrueHD, as we are no longer limited to the 448kbps data rate on DVD. Hence why Dolby Digital is called a legacy codec, it has been replaced on bluray with something else more effective on the format.

And no stupid azz, I do not sell players. Do you still clean toilets? Perhaps the fumes from the cleaners you use have rotted your already useless cheese ball of a brain.


You need to quit nitpicking and go back to picking your nose.
HATE TO TELL YA ACE but nobody gives a rats azz if a DD stream is variable or not, not gonna affect the sound.
And I would rather clean toilets than deal with the likes of you.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-08-2008, 07:47 AM
[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]


You need to quit nitpicking and go back to picking your nose.
HATE TO TELL YA ACE but nobody gives a rats azz if a DD stream is variable or not, not gonna affect the sound.
And I would rather clean toilets than deal with the likes of you.

Just what I thought, all mouth, all attitude, but no brains. Are you sure you are not John McCain?

bobsticks
08-08-2008, 04:48 PM
You two are like a scene outta "Grumpy Old Men".

jamison
08-09-2008, 05:29 PM
I think you guys should get a job on Orange County Choppers you would fit in perfectly.

jamison
08-11-2008, 08:04 PM
Just what I thought, all mouth, all attitude, but no brains. Are you sure you are not John McCain?[/QUOTE]
at least McCain isnt for a 30 % tax hike across the board like Obama is. Obama wants change which is all youll have left after 4 yrs of his policies.

pixelthis
08-12-2008, 01:00 AM
Just what I thought, all mouth, all attitude, but no brains. Are you sure you are not John McCain?
at least McCain isnt for a 30 % tax hike across the board like Obama is. Obama wants change which is all youll have left after 4 yrs of his policies.[/QUOTE]

FOR A TAXPAYER to vote for Obama would be like a chicken
voting for popeyes.
Although he probably will win, as predicted in the Bible...
you know, the desolaton of OBAMA nation...
And for the record Blu players do sound great, a lot of titles are going DTS, so they can use that 1.5 bitrate for the vast majority that doesnt
have DTS master..
And the regular DVD soundtracks are great also, very nice.:1:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-12-2008, 10:20 AM
Just what I thought, all mouth, all attitude, but no brains. Are you sure you are not John McCain?
at least McCain isnt for a 30 % tax hike across the board like Obama is. Obama wants change which is all youll have left after 4 yrs of his policies.[/QUOTE]

Did you know our national debt is close to a trillion dollars? How do you think we will balance the budget with no tax hikes? A bake sale?

How are we going to put our infrastructure back together? Yard sale?

It is a fallacy to believe that you can deal with all of the financial issues we have going on right now without some way to raise revenue. The republicans in the last eight years have shown you exactly what will happen when you spend like a wild person, and have tax cuts as well. Our destiny is now in the hands of China, and Japan who hold most of our debt. If China started stop supporting our debt, we in short order would be reduced to a third world country.

You must like how things have been going for the last eight years. Good, vote for McCain. If you think things look bad now, wait. McCain will most certainly make it worse.

JSE
08-12-2008, 11:21 AM
Did you know our national debt is close to a trillion dollars? How do you think we will balance the budget with no tax hikes? A bake sale?

How are we going to put our infrastructure back together? Yard sale?

It is a fallacy to believe that you can deal with all of the financial issues we have going on right now without some way to raise revenue. The republicans in the last eight years have shown you exactly what will happen when you spend like a wild person, and have tax cuts as well. Our destiny is now in the hands of China, and Japan who hold most of our debt. If China started stop supporting our debt, we in short order would be reduced to a third world country.

You must like how things have been going for the last eight years. Good, vote for McCain. If you think things look bad now, wait. McCain will most certainly make it worse.



We pay enough taxes already. We don't need a tax increase to balance the budget. We really need to reign in spending and that applies to both the republicans and democrats. Raising taxes is not the answer. Of course the same can be said for McCain and Obama. Neither is going to do a bit of good for this country. Once again we have two people who really have no business being president as our only two choices. Wohoooo! With McCain we get more of the same and with Obama we get "Change". What change? Change for the sake of change is not always a good thing. As soon as he has some "real" ideas, I would be happy to listen. And by "ideas" I mean ideas that are feaseable and make sense. Oh, and ideas that have a chance of actually being implemented. Anyone can just get up and start spouting off "ideas". That's easy. Unfortunately we have a bunch of mindless drones as citizens that will listen to what ever each candidate says without giving any real thought about whether they are actually making any sense.

BTW, how bout' we button up those borders? Maybe send some people back accross instead of letting them stay here to suck up our resouces without paying any of those taxes Obama is so fond of? I'm guessing that would help our economy more than any tax increase. We've got some fences going up but not nearly enough and not nearly fast enough. We have gone from the Land of the Free to the Land of the Free Ride. It's sickening.

Anyway, rant over. It was my thread anyway and I can say what I want. :D

johnny p
08-12-2008, 11:53 AM
I have 2 PS3s for Blu-ray playback (as mentioned earlier) and no PS3 games (as stated earlier) The PS3 is a multi-media machine... wi-fi, etc. etc. etc.... it's great. There are benefits to stand-alones, but anyways..... dollar-for-dollar, and spec-for-spec, the PS3 is the way to go currently....

Also, I use two AVRs that don't decode the new audio codecs.....they accept the PCM, so I have the PS3 decode them..... because of the PS3's capabilities, I was able to save a ton of cash on heavily discounted AVRs (Marantz 7001, and 5001 )

either way.... I appologize for getting back on topic :)

GMichael
08-12-2008, 11:59 AM
I appologize for getting back on topic :)

Keep it up and we'll have to punish you.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-12-2008, 12:57 PM
We pay enough taxes already. We don't need a tax increase to balance the budget. We really need to reign in spending and that applies to both the republicans and democrats. Raising taxes is not the answer. Of course the same can be said for McCain and Obama. Neither is going to do a bit of good for this country. Once again we have two people who really have no business being president as our only two choices. Wohoooo! With McCain we get more of the same and with Obama we get "Change". What change? Change for the sake of change is not always a good thing. As soon as he has some "real" ideas, I would be happy to listen. And by "ideas" I mean ideas that are feaseable and make sense. Oh, and ideas that have a chance of actually being implemented. Anyone can just get up and start spouting off "ideas". That's easy. Unfortunately we have a bunch of mindless drones as citizens that will listen to what ever each candidate says without giving any real thought about whether they are actually making any sense.

Actually you may not need to pay more taxes, but the wealthy and business should. If you knew how much they are paying tax accountant to find loopholes so they do not have to pay their fair share, you wouldn't be so quick to say this. What do you consider a "real" idea?

Dismissing change is advocating for things to stay the way they are. If you are paying attention to what is going on around this country, change is exactly what we need. Any good plan begins with an idea, and grows from there so don't be so quick to dismiss change as a need for this country. Being so cynical and fearful about change is what has lead to where we are now, doing nothing. Almost every responsible economist says that just cutting spending in Washington will not do enough to tackle our out of control budget. We need to raise taxes on those who have benefitted from Bush's policies over the last 8 years. That would be the rich, and big businesses. Do we really want candidates with no ideas?

Don't you think that we need to get away from oil, which financially supports our enemies against us? Do you think that we need energy that does not hurt the planet in both production and in use? Don't you think it is important that our destiny lies in our hands, rather than China's, Irans, or Saudi Arabia?


BTW, how bout' we button up those borders? Maybe send some people back accross instead of letting them stay here to suck up our resouces without paying any of those taxes Obama is so fond of? I'm guessing that would help our economy more than any tax increase. We've got some fences going up but not nearly enough and not nearly fast enough. We have gone from the Land of the Free to the Land of the Free Ride. It's sickening.

This is a one sided perspective. Why you think they suck up resources, keep in mind they pay taxes, social security, state taxes, and they get nothing back from doing it like Americans do. They do not get refunds, they do not get retirement of which they pay into. They do not use emergency rooms, they don't seek hospitalization, but they are a burden to law enforcement in some areas. Next time you eat out, remember that because they are here doing jobs that Americans won't, you can afford to eat out, while they work for minimum wage and can't. I am not supporting illegal imigration, but I think the negatives that are mentioned as a reason to see them leave are at best red herrings. I can think of another one that is less financial and more practical. I do not want Al Qaida to walk accross that boarder and blow up another anything, and kill any more US citizens.
Sucking up resources is a symbiant activity going both ways. We get cheap help(thats a reality), and they get a pay check to send to their families(which I would prefer the government and businesses to the south of us would do)



Anyway, rant over. It was my thread anyway and I can say what I want. :D

And you did!!!

JSE
08-12-2008, 01:44 PM
Actually you may not need to pay more taxes, but the wealthy and business should. If you knew how much they are paying tax accountant to find loopholes so they do not have to pay their fair share, you wouldn't be so quick to say this. What do you consider a "real" idea?

I have no problem inforcing the tax laws that are on the books now and I also think we need to address the the mountain of loopholes that exist by finding them and getting rid of them. These two thing would probably solve 90% of our tax problems. Why don't we fix the problem instead of just taxing people more and more? Seems reasonable to me.


Dismissing change is advocating for things to stay the way they are. If you are paying attention to what is going on around this country, change is exactly what we need. Any good plan begins with an idea, and grows from there so don't be so quick to dismiss change as a need for this country. Being so cynical and fearful about change is what has lead to where we are now, doing nothing. Almost every responsible economist says that just cutting spending in Washington will not do enough to tackle our out of control budget. We need to raise taxes on those who have benefitted from Bush's policies over the last 8 years. That would be the rich, and big businesses. Do we really want candidates with no ideas?

I'm not dismissing change and I am not afraid of change. We need a lot of change in this country. I just have a problem with some blow-hard candidate preaching "Change" with nothing to back it up with. Again, what change? I just keep hearing the idealistic talking points that really have no basis in reality.


Don't you think that we need to get away from oil, which financially supports our enemies against us? Do you think that we need energy that does not hurt the planet in both production and in use? Don't you think it is important that our destiny lies in our hands, rather than China's, Irans, or Saudi Arabia?

Of course we need to get away from oil. But How? Electricity is not advanced enough to be feasable. Solar and Wind are not efficient enough except on a small scale. Nuclear? Yeah, the environmentalist would have a field day with that. I think both candidates see this as an issue but it's not something that can just be fixed overnight. It's going to take decades. I actually don't support opening the restricred oilfields, there is not enough oil there to give us any sense of oil independence. They are only a drop in the bucket compared to the worlds oil fields. The bottom line is we are going to be dependent on foreign oil for a long time. Again, both candidates can say we need oil independence but how do they "really" suggest we do that? I have not heard any real ideas other than more funding for research which is a no brainer. Tax cuts for alternative fuel research? Whoops, did I say tax cuts? I say tax cut, you (not really you) say loophole.



This is a one sided perspective. Why you think they suck up resources, keep in mind they pay taxes, social security, state taxes, and they get nothing back from doing it like Americans do.

They pay taxes? Other than sales tax, what taxes? Social Security? State Taxes? Are you kidding me? If an illegal alien does not have a SS#, how are they paying SS? If they don't own property, what taxes are they paying? Most illegal aliens are paid "off the books" so what taxes are they paying?


They do not get refunds,

Refunds on what?


They do not use emergency rooms, they don't seek hospitalization, but they are a burden to law enforcement in some areas.

Have you been to a county hospital in Texas or other boder state? They are packed with illegal aliens. Not sure where your coming from on that one. It simply could not be farther from the truth.



Next time you eat out, remember that because they are here doing jobs that Americans won't, you can afford to eat out, while they work for minimum wage and can't. I am not supporting illegal imigration, but I think the negatives that are mentioned as a reason to see them leave are at best red herrings. I can think of another one that is less financial and more practical. I do not want Al Qaida to walk accross that boarder and blow up another anything, and kill any more US citizens.
Sucking up resources is a symbiant activity going both ways. We get cheap help(thats a reality), and they get a pay check to send to their families(which I would prefer the government and businesses to the south of us would do)

I agree and I should have elaborated further before. Give them a chance to "get on the books" and become american citizens. Start paying taxes. If they don't.....well............on the southbound bus they go. I also think we need to do away with the citizenship by way of birth laws.

And yes, we also need to close the border to keep terrorists out. That's a biggie as well.



And you did!!! Dang, did it again.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-12-2008, 04:02 PM
I have no problem inforcing the tax laws that are on the books now and I also think we need to address the the mountain of loopholes that exist by finding them and getting rid of them. These two thing would probably solve 90% of our tax problems. Why don't we fix the problem instead of just taxing people more and more? Seems reasonable to me.

When you close those loopholes, and start inforcing the laws on the books, some (republicans especially) will look at that as a tax increase, because it will require those involved to pay more. The already do that with a temporary tax cut for the rich. If you decide to lift those cuts, to them its considered a tax hike.




I'm not dismissing change and I am not afraid of change. We need a lot of change in this country. I just have a problem with some blow-hard candidate preaching "Change" with nothing to back it up with. Again, what change? I just keep hearing the idealistic talking points that really have no basis in reality.

You obviously have not been listening to him very closely, or just listening to sound bites, because he has come out with a plan for every "change" he intends to make. Why don't you call McCain a blow-hard? He wants to keep the tax cuts for the rich in place, and balance the budget by 2012. Everyone knows this is not possible, but yet he escapes the blow-hard title. Are we so locked in to the norm that we demonize those who actually represent change, and have shown how they will do it? There is nothing idealistic about what he says; its only idealic to those who are scared of change and something new. Before calling him a blow-hard, perhaps turn off CNN and Fox news, and get on his website and read.


Of course we need to get away from oil. But How? Electricity is not advanced enough to be feasable. Solar and Wind are not efficient enough except on a small scale. Nuclear? Yeah, the environmentalist would have a field day with that. I think both candidates see this as an issue but it's not something that can just be fixed overnight. It's going to take decades. I actually don't support opening the restricred oilfields, there is not enough oil there to give us any sense of oil independence. They are only a drop in the bucket compared to the worlds oil fields. The bottom line is we are going to be dependent on foreign oil for a long time. Again, both candidates can say we need oil independence but how do they "really" suggest we do that? I have not heard any real ideas other than more funding for research which is a no brainer. Tax cuts for alternative fuel research? Whoops, did I say tax cuts? I say tax cut, you (not really you) say loophole.

We have to start somewhere sometime. The only way to figure out how, is to start leaning that direction, and not be paralyzed by what we cannot see. Remember, this country sent people to the moon. Back in that day, nobody had a clue how it was going to be done, but they figured it out once the government began working with private business to figure it out. You start out with alternative fuels, hybrids, and fuel cells, master those technologies, and you are well on your way towards independence. Start with building smaller houses with better layouts complete with energy efficiency, water saving infrastucture, that takes you further. They have a huge solar farm in the Mojave desert here in Cali, and they plan on building another(they have already broke ground and have the funding) to build a solar farm and storage area designed to provide electricity to 10 million homes(the entire city of LA and some). T Boone Pickens(an oil man) see's wind farms in the midwest as another piece to getting there. There are alot of places to start, too many to be paralyzed by ignorance and fear.





They pay taxes? Other than sales tax, what taxes? Social Security? State Taxes? Are you kidding me? If an illegal alien does not have a SS#, how are they paying SS? If they don't own property, what taxes are they paying? Most illegal aliens are paid "off the books" so what taxes are they paying?

In cali you cannot work without a SS number. So they get a SS number from a dead person, and a fake id, but they have to pay SS to the dead persons number, they don't get it back. They HAVE to pay payroll taxes, or it is a bright neon sign saying tax cheat, and the IRS would be all over them. Secondly, its complete misinformation to think that most Illegals are paid off the books. They are the minority. The majority of illegals work in farms, hotels, and packing plants depending on their location in this country, and they have to pay taxes just like we do, or they that employ them are in extreme danger of a raid, or an audit. They are clamping down hard on this to discourage illegals from coming in the first place, and in California, it is working(a bad economy also helps). If we just sent them all home, the economic impact would be very severe.

http://www.americansforimmigrationreform.com/files/Impact_of_the_Undocumented_Workforce.pdf




Refunds on what?

Taxes they pay. My best friend is a high powered exec for a VERY large hotel management firm. He tells me that they know they have illegals working in their hotels(as do alot of hotels), and they pay payroll taxes, SS is taken out as are state taxes as well. When illegals get here, they know they must get a SS card(faked usually) an ID or drivers liscense(usually faked as well). The also manage tons of restaurants as well, and the same case there. The construction industry is full of tax paying undocumented workers that receiver no refund on their taxes. If they paid no taxes, I guarantee you they would not be here in the numbers they are.

http://www.reason.org/commentaries/dalmia_20060501.shtml

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/business/05immigration.html

I think we need to be real, instead of real ignorant when talking about whether illegals pay taxes or not. You cannot assume that all of them work under the table. Some do, but the majority do not.


Have you been to a county hospital in Texas or other boder state? They are packed with illegal aliens. Not sure where your coming from on that one. It simply could not be farther from the truth.

You cannot mention one state, and then tell me I am far from the truth. The facts really are not in your favor here. Remember I live on a border state, and county hospitals are for those who DO NOT have insurance, illegal or not. Americans, with and without health insurance are clogging up emergency rooms and hospitals themselves. The CDC reported last week that emergency room visits by Americans jumped 32% since 1996, and they were not the poor, but the rich.. Now if you can magically look in the face of all those you call illegal, and know they are illegal, then you have a point. But the reality is, you cannot tell an illegal from legal resident, and most likely your are broad brushing. You cannot assume that EVERYONE from a certain race is illegal, just because some are.

http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/04/08/rich-not-poor-are-crowding-emergency-rooms/?mod=WSJBlog

http://www.annemergmed.com/webfiles/images/journals/ymem/ejweber.pdf

http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/calaaem/2004-November/000428.html


I agree and I should have elaborated further before. Give them a chance to "get on the books" and become american citizens. Start paying taxes. If they don't.....well............on the southbound bus they go. I also think we need to do away with the citizenship by way of birth laws.

I agree with this wholeheartedly, but with a caviat. They do not get in line ahead of those who are going through the process legally, and always have been. They go to the rear of the line IMO, but they must be in the line nevertheless.

JSE, we cannot get stuck on soundbites and talking points. Nothing is as it seems on the surface many times(and all most of us see is the surface), and not all that is spread is truth. I suspect that much of the resistance to letting illegals become citizens has more to do with a forbidden topic that no one wants to talk about, and that same topic is what makes Obama look like a idealistic blow-hard, and leaves McCain unscathed.


And yes, we also need to close the border to keep terrorists out. That's a biggie as well.


Dang, did it again.

You sure in the heck did. Here is a burrito for ya. Do your damage brudda!!!

bobsticks
08-12-2008, 06:47 PM
...to respond properly to wisdom like:
Of course the same can be said for McCain and Obama. Neither is going to do a bit of good for this country. Once again we have two people who really have no business being president as our only two choices.

Let's start off with a few specifics:


Did you know our national debt is close to a trillion dollars? How do you think we will balance the budget with no tax hikes? A bake sale?

How are we going to put our infrastructure back together? Yard sale?

Yes, we're gonna have to make some hard decisions but, once again, the moderate middle and pundits for fair and responsible government are shut out. Why is there no middleground in this conversation. Why is it that the conversation must be between a tax cut and a thirty percent raise?

We need to look at the way we raise and allocate tax dollars. Recognize that a ridiculous amount of expenditures are added to the budget through sub-additions to bills. This is the so-called "pork barreling". This is how we get amendments to crime bills that allocate funds to scientific research on the consistency of ketchup. We need line-item-veto. (Wanna get mad? Check out a report from the OMB and look at what we actually pay for.)

For that you're you need only to look to the candidate representing the middle ground...oh yeah, he/she ain't around because that person would be educated, making them unpalletable to the Far-Right and would insist that people get up in the morning and go to work...a foreign concept to the Far-Left. Of course your Congressman might support that candidate...right after they convince the guy that works in the meth lab to support stauncher sentences on crystal abusers.


We have gone from the Land of the Free to the Land of the Free Ride. It's sickening. Well not so much...and kinda. Terrence has done a comendable job addressing some of the fallacies regarding the contributions that aliens make to the society, and payroll taxes are a huge contribution that seems to be constantly overlooked. That said,...um...


They do not use emergency rooms, they don't seek hospitalization...

Yeah, not so much...

http://www.rense.com/general63/emta.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJxmJZXgNI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDjZ6gzo0C4
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?threadid=335407
http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=4197

aw, hell...http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hospitals+closed+shut+down+illegal+immigrants&btnG=Search

By the way the insurance companies love this stuff. For everyone of these cases they can raise costs exponentially ($25 asprin anyone?). Kinda like a fire in Ash Shu'aybah can result in a 0.30 rise in the price per barrel of oil. It's disproportionate.


The CDC reported last week that emergency room visits by Americans jumped 32% since 1996, and they were not the poor, but the rich..

Hell yeah, bruh and that number just rose by one. I just cancelled my health insurance and plan on denying the E-unit my SS next time. I'm an illegal from Greenland, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.


I suspect that much of the resistance to letting illegals become citizens has more to do with a forbidden topic that no one wants to talk about, and that same topic is what makes Obama look like a idealistic blow-hard, and leaves McCain unscathed.

Or, maybe it's that folks want everyone to bear the burden equally, the rights and responsibilities of citizenry. Yes, we have established that illegal immigrants pay some taxes to a larger degree than is publicly held. At the same time the burdens in the medical, academic and law enforcement areas are significant. If the problems are systemic you search for systemic solutions, not ones based on a "wanna pay-don't wanna pay" basis cuz nobody wants to pay. I would prefer that we all contribute than return to the days of midwives and leeches.

On that basis alone I would respectfully submit that Shikha Dalmia can shove his "Denying public services to people who pay their taxes is an affront to America's bedrock belief in fairness. But many "pull-up-the-drawbridge" politicians want to do just that when it comes to illegal immigrants" rhetoric up his ass.

It isn't always about race T, sometimes it's about standing in line with the rest of us. I'm surprised GMichael hasn't weighed in on this.


Why don't you call McCain a blow-hard? He wants to keep the tax cuts for the rich in place, and balance the budget by 2012.
Absolutely. He's the worst kind of party hack, backpedaling into the prevailing winds of convenience. He's like a less-mean Sesame Street version of Cheney. On the other hand, massive tax increases will do nothing to spur economic growth nor will they do anything to promote American owned businesses...there's really not any guarantee that the revenues will be used to balance the budget either. Obama can promise this as much as he wants but Congress will ratify whatever budget it wants...and override any veto that threatened its pork-barrel self-interests.

You want a thirty percent tax increase? I got one word for ya...Europe. No thanks. That's just trading one set of problems for another and, frankly, I don't think we need to give people less of an incentive to go to work (see European unemployment figures)...


As an aside, there has been some discussion of McCain pledging to a one-term Presidency. To these political sensibilities that's something that Obama supporters should be very afraid of. It'll cost McCain nothing in party goodwill and would energize the following groups:
1) people that don't like taxes
2) moderates of both parties that are on the fence
3) people with health/age concerns
4) rascists
5) Hillary supporters

Just a thought...and one that makes me wistful for the idea of a viable third party.






so gutter

JSE
08-12-2008, 08:51 PM
When you close those loopholes, and start inforcing the laws on the books, some (republicans especially) will look at that as a tax increase, because it will require those involved to pay more. The already do that with a temporary tax cut for the rich. If you decide to lift those cuts, to them its considered a tax hike.

Call it what you want but it's the only way to fairly resolve the issue within our current tax system. The rich can complain all they want. Tough ****!


You obviously have not been listening to him very closely, or just listening to sound bites, because he has come out with a plan for every "change" he intends to make. Why don't you call McCain a blow-hard? He wants to keep the tax cuts for the rich in place, and balance the budget by 2012. Everyone knows this is not possible, but yet he escapes the blow-hard title. Are we so locked in to the norm that we demonize those who actually represent change, and have shown how they will do it? There is nothing idealistic about what he says; its only idealic to those who are scared of change and something new. Before calling him a blow-hard, perhaps turn off CNN and Fox news, and get on his website and read.

Just to be clear, I think they are both blowhard idiots. I was just using Obama as an example. They are two politicians just like the many before them. I'm tired of politicians but unfortunately in todays election process we only get to choose the least offensive pawn. And thinking what Obama says is idealistic is not just because myself or someone else is scared of change or something new. I want change just as much as you but again these pawns are not going to be the ones to do it. And for the record, I don't get my news from CNN or Fox.

I have actually read Obama website from "page to page" over the last few months and I am basing my opions partly on his own words. Maybe you should take a lool at McCain and R. Paul's website for some balance to your savior. I'm not saying either of them are right on all topics but I sure do like of lot of Paul's ideas. Too bad he has no chance in hell of making any further waves.


We have to start somewhere sometime. The only way to figure out how, is to start leaning that direction, and not be paralyzed by what we cannot see. Remember, this country sent people to the moon. Back in that day, nobody had a clue how it was going to be done, but they figured it out once the government began working with private business to figure it out. You start out with alternative fuels, hybrids, and fuel cells, master those technologies, and you are well on your way towards independence. Start with building smaller houses with better layouts complete with energy efficiency, water saving infrastucture, that takes you further. They have a huge solar farm in the Mojave desert here in Cali, and they plan on building another(they have already broke ground and have the funding) to build a solar farm and storage area designed to provide electricity to 10 million homes(the entire city of LA and some). T Boone Pickens(an oil man) see's wind farms in the midwest as another piece to getting there. There are alot of places to start, too many to be paralyzed by ignorance and fear.

I think we are actually on the same side here. I am all for more research. I'm just being realistic in saying solar and wind are not the answers to solve our energy problems. They will help but we need other alternatives. Even T. Boone admits this! And, I'm guessing T-Boone has his hand the pot somewhere. That's just T Boone's way.

We absolutely need to explore other energy alternatives but we also need to focus on the here and now and the hear and now is OIL! We're going to need a lot of it over the next 50 to 100years.



In cali you cannot work without a SS number. So they get a SS number from a dead person, and a fake id, but they have to pay SS to the dead persons number, they don't get it back. They HAVE to pay payroll taxes, or it is a bright neon sign saying tax cheat, and the IRS would be all over them. Secondly, its complete misinformation to think that most Illegals are paid off the books. They are the minority. The majority of illegals work in farms, hotels, and packing plants depending on their location in this country, and they have to pay taxes just like we do, or they that employ them are in extreme danger of a raid, or an audit. They are clamping down hard on this to discourage illegals from coming in the first place, and in California, it is working(a bad economy also helps). If we just sent them all home, the economic impact would be very severe.

http://www.americansforimmigrationreform.com/files/Impact_of_the_Undocumented_Workforce.pdf





Taxes they pay. My best friend is a high powered exec for a VERY large hotel management firm. He tells me that they know they have illegals working in their hotels(as do alot of hotels), and they pay payroll taxes, SS is taken out as are state taxes as well. When illegals get here, they know they must get a SS card(faked usually) an ID or drivers liscense(usually faked as well). The also manage tons of restaurants as well, and the same case there. The construction industry is full of tax paying undocumented workers that receiver no refund on their taxes. If they paid no taxes, I guarantee you they would not be here in the numbers they are.

http://www.reason.org/commentaries/dalmia_20060501.shtml

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/business/05immigration.html

I think we need to be real, instead of real ignorant when talking about whether illegals pay taxes or not. You cannot assume that all of them work under the table. Some do, but the majority do not.

These are also based on a false number of illegal aliens in the country. No politician wants to admit the real number which by some reports might likely be almost double the "official" number. I'll accept that many illegal aliens pay taxes but I cannot agree that the "windfall" SS money is more than what the true cost of illegal immigration is in terms of money, resources, free healthcare, government programs, and the loss of reported taxable income.


You cannot mention one state, and then tell me I am far from the truth. The facts really are not in your favor here. Remember I live on a border state, and county hospitals are for those who DO NOT have insurance, illegal or not. Americans, with and without health insurance are clogging up emergency rooms and hospitals themselves. The CDC reported last week that emergency room visits by Americans jumped 32% since 1996, and they were not the poor, but the rich.. Now if you can magically look in the face of all those you call illegal, and know they are illegal, then you have a point. But the reality is, you cannot tell an illegal from legal resident, and most likely your are broad brushing. You cannot assume that EVERYONE from a certain race is illegal, just because some are.


http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/04/08/rich-not-poor-are-crowding-emergency-rooms/?mod=WSJBlog

http://www.annemergmed.com/webfiles/images/journals/ymem/ejweber.pdf

http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/calaaem/2004-November/000428.html


I did not mention one State. I mentioned Texas "or any other border state". Of course county hospitals are for people who do not have insurance. However, they are for US citizens without insurance. Not illegal aliens. E/R visits jumped for the rich. What's your point? Are the rich not allowed to get injured?

And yes, many times you can tell who is illegal. No SS#, No TDL? At least in Texas chances are they are not legal. And who said I am assuming "EVERYONE" from a certain race is illegal just because some are. Could not be farther from the truth. The fact is that hispanics makes up the majority of illegal aliens. Just a fact. I know a lot of E/R doctors through my wife's work. I am friend with many of them. They have told me first hand the E/R's are being used on a daily basis by illegal aliens. People without health insurance use the E/R in place of a primary doctor. That is fine for citizens. Not so much for illegal aliens. County hospitals were not intended to support the healthcare needs of illegal aliens.



I agree with this wholeheartedly, but with a caviat. They do not get in line ahead of those who are going through the process legally, and always have been. They go to the rear of the line IMO, but they must be in the line nevertheless.

Agreed.



JSE, we cannot get stuck on soundbites and talking points. Nothing is as it seems on the surface many times(and all most of us see is the surface), and not all that is spread is truth.

Agree 100%. See my above comments about Blowhard Idiot Politicians. What's the saying? Never trust a politician?



I suspect that much of the resistance to letting illegals become citizens has more to do with a forbidden topic that no one wants to talk about, and that same topic is what makes Obama look like a idealistic blow-hard, and leaves McCain unscathed.

I hope your not grouping me in that category. I thought you knew me better than that. Like Sticks mentioned, I think it's more about paying your share and being a felow citizen and living under the same "burden" as the rest of us. I could care less about race in terms of illegal immigration. Just come here legally. If you want to stay, I will show you where to get in line and I will even buy the first round of beer afterwards. Hell, I'll even buy them a beer just to get them in line.





You sure in the heck did. Here is a burrito for ya. Do your damage brudda!!!

My own little way of combating illegal immigration! :arf:

captjamo
08-12-2008, 10:38 PM
I have 2 PS3s for Blu-ray playback (as mentioned earlier) and no PS3 games (as stated earlier) The PS3 is a multi-media machine... wi-fi, etc. etc. etc.... it's great. There are benefits to stand-alones, but anyways..... dollar-for-dollar, and spec-for-spec, the PS3 is the way to go currently....

Also, I use two AVRs that don't decode the new audio codecs.....they accept the PCM, so I have the PS3 decode them..... because of the PS3's capabilities, I was able to save a ton of cash on heavily discounted AVRs (Marantz 7001, and 5001 )

either way.... I appologize for getting back on topic :)

:confused: What setting should I keep my PS3 on since I'm hooked up to a receiver with the new codecs via HDMI v1.3? Automatic? My receiver says it is receiving PCM. I know I should know but, hey, I'm not home that much. I heard the PS3 does not decode DTS Master Audio yet (firmware upgrade at some point). Is this still true? I'm pretty sure True HD is decoding just fine.:blush2:

Rich-n-Texas
08-13-2008, 04:52 AM
This thread is really pissing me off! Did you include Sir T. that obtaining a fake SS number is ILLEGAL??? in your defense of the poor illegal alien? Did you mention that Identity theft is ILLEGAL??? How do know some illegal alien doesn't have YOUR DL number or SS number? If my identity was stolen, my finances damaged, or my credit rating damaged and I found the person responsible, that person would suffer serious consequences. And this bit about Mexicans doing the jobs Americans don't want to do? WTF??? First of all, who said? We've got people illegally obtaining Welfare checks who could be doing the jobs "Americans don't want to do". That's fvckin' bullsh!t! All of these assumptions you and others make are YOUR OWN OPINION!!! And you'll just continue to bully anyone who doesn't agree with you with your own opinions that you state as facts until they give up and move on. I've seen plenty of examples in your posts dude.

They pay taxes? Other than sales tax, what taxes? Social Security? State Taxes? Are you kidding me? If an illegal alien does not have a SS#, how are they paying SS? If they don't own property, what taxes are they paying? Most illegal aliens are paid "off the books" so what taxes are they paying?
This is ABSOLUTELY 100% correct. But Sir T says they ARE paying taxes with ILLEGALLY OBTAINED IDENTITIES!!! That makes it okay right? How sad.

Here's one that just KILLS me:

Actually you may not need to pay more taxes, but the wealthy and business should. If you knew how much they are paying tax accountant to find loopholes so they do not have to pay their fair share, you wouldn't be so quick to say this. What do you consider a "real" idea?
What do you consider "their fair share" T? You're knocking JSE's remark with your own opinion. Give me some hard facts showing what their fair share is supposed to be. I'll be the first to admit that corporate greed is one aspect of Capitalism that keeps poor people poor and other classes from getting ahead, but as has been the case for years and years, the party that promotes change is using hollow words just as a means to an end. And let's not ignore the fact that the economy is cyclic. It doesn't matter who's in office. BTW, the dollar is gaining strength, and oil prices are dropping like a rock. Do we have Obama's ideas for "change" to thank for that?

Taxes they pay. My best friend is a high powered exec for a VERY large hotel management firm. He tells me that they know they have illegals working in their hotels(as do alot of hotels), and they pay payroll taxes, SS is taken out as are state taxes as well. When illegals get here, they know they must get a SS card(faked usually) an ID or drivers liscense(usually faked as well). The also manage tons of restaurants as well, and the same case there. The construction industry is full of tax paying undocumented workers that receiver no refund on their taxes. If they paid no taxes, I guarantee you they would not be here in the numbers they are.
Really? What's his name? What's the Hotel Management firm's name? Got a phone number so I can verify your relationship to him? I say bullsh!t.

Again you're making statements about illegals paying taxes based on ILLEGALLY obtained identities. Don't you see what you're typing?
And in closing T, if you want to ignore anything I say other than the cute little wisecracks we trade that's fine. You're WAY too opinionated for my taste.

GMichael
08-13-2008, 06:01 AM
...
It isn't always about race T, sometimes it's about standing in line with the rest of us. I'm surprised GMichael hasn't weighed in on this.


I agree.
I agree so strongly that I don't want to get started and end up losing it.

All of you are making some good points. I'm enjoying reading every post.

In the end, I'm not happy with either party. They need to stop spending so much effort on sticking their tongues out at each other and work together on solutions. (Not just "A" solution. There is no one quick fix to all our problems.)

I don't like extreme views of almost any kind. The far left is wrong. The far right is wrong. The answers are somewhere in the middle. But no one can be in the middle because if they are, both extremes will tear them apart. Neither side seems willing to see the other sides points and say, "Gee, maybe they have a point." Their all so busy shouting, "The other side SUCKS!" that they can't agree and get anything done.

Oh, JSE,
I think a PS3 is the best choice for BR right now.

L.J.
08-13-2008, 06:05 AM
:confused: What setting should I keep my PS3 on since I'm hooked up to a receiver with the new codecs via HDMI v1.3? Automatic? My receiver says it is receiving PCM. I know I should know but, hey, I'm not home that much. I heard the PS3 does not decode DTS Master Audio yet (firmware upgrade at some point). Is this still true? I'm pretty sure True HD is decoding just fine.:blush2:

PS3 can't bitstream. Set your BD audio to Linear PCM. The PS3 will decode everything and your AVR will see it as PCM. It decodes all the HD audio formats, including DTSMA so your good to go. Just hit display(triangle) on your controller to get details on what the PS3 is outputting.

JSE
08-13-2008, 07:25 AM
BTW, the dollar is gaining strength, and oil prices are dropping like a rock. Do we have Obama's ideas for "change" to thank for that?

No, it was his pilgrimage through the middle east last month. What a joke. I can't believe he did not get to use the "Pope-Mobile". :shocked: That would have been priceless.

JSE
08-13-2008, 07:32 AM
Oh, JSE,
I think a PS3 is the best choice for BR right now.

I'm loving mine so far. Could not be happier. Although the wife says it's too big. :idea:

johnny p
08-13-2008, 07:55 AM
PS3 can't bitstream. Set your BD audio to Linear PCM. The PS3 will decode everything and your AVR will see it as PCM. It decodes all the HD audio formats, including DTSMA so your good to go. Just hit display(triangle) on your controller to get details on what the PS3 is outputting.


Thanks L.J. you beat me to it!!!!

I hit "Select" to display the audio (top right corner) but either way... same thing.

I've heard people upgrade receivers because "It doesn't say HD MA on the Receiver" when they KNOW their getting that audio because the display on the t.v. is telling them, but it's not "cool enough" if their receiver doesn't say it....... that's some seriously shallow people in my opinion, who must feel the need to show off to compensate for....errr...uh..... "other" short-comings ??????

GMichael
08-13-2008, 08:36 AM
I'm loving mine so far. Could not be happier. Although the wife says it's too big. :idea:

Are we still talking about the PS3?:yikes:

captjamo
08-13-2008, 11:54 AM
PS3 can't bitstream. Set your BD audio to Linear PCM. The PS3 will decode everything and your AVR will see it as PCM. It decodes all the HD audio formats, including DTSMA so your good to go. Just hit display(triangle) on your controller to get details on what the PS3 is outputting.

Thanks, LJ I'm pretty sure I'm good. Thought I was getting DTSMA but wasn't completely sure:thumbsup:

captjamo
08-13-2008, 11:59 AM
Thanks L.J. you beat me to it!!!!

I hit "Select" to display the audio (top right corner) but either way... same thing.

I've heard people upgrade receivers because "It doesn't say HD MA on the Receiver" when they KNOW their getting that audio because the display on the t.v. is telling them, but it's not "cool enough" if their receiver doesn't say it....... that's some seriously shallow people in my opinion, who must feel the need to show off to compensate for....errr...uh..... "other" short-comings ??????

Forgot about that little select button thing, thanks.:blush2:

captjamo
08-13-2008, 01:00 PM
:3: Interesting posts BTW. :mad5: temps are a ris'n aint they. Better listen to something soothing :21: quick before going crazy :crazy:

Some things I would try and do if I were trying not to be a worthless leechitician:

1. Pass the fair tax system ( FAIR woooow coooool)
Paris was right, increase drilling (enviro impact is not as damaging as it is made out to be -I know I work there) while providing corp tax incentives to auto mfg to re-tool more efficient vehicles.
2. Make the drive-thru illegal accept for disabled folks (get your fat ass out of the SUV and save some fuel while burning calories)
3. 4-day work week for many workers( what happened to that idea) means less commutes.
4. Close all but convenience/gas stores on Sunday ( c'mon, you can't get to the store on any of the 6 other days of the week--who knows--maybe families will spend more quality time together--maybe evan put the brakes on the crumbling family, community, work force, nation situation
5. Corporate incentives for healthy lifestyle, environmentally friendly behaviors, i.e., lower health insurance premiums for cycling to work, free fix it yourself smoothie bar, etc.
6. No tax on scooter purchases, and no license exam required if a person holds a valid driver license ( I can see scooter clubs forming now, their tricked out custom scoots clustered at Sonic, people actually conversing face to face, OMG, kind of gay but hey they do get up and down the beach in pretty cool fashion, and cheaply).

Phew! Wore out. Talk border/illegals problem later. :3:

jamison
08-13-2008, 03:11 PM
Phew! Wore out. Talk border/illegals problem later.

dig a ditch 30 feet wide along the mexican/us border, fill the ditch with alligators and take all the soil dug out of the ditch and give it to new orleans so they can build a better barrier for when the next big hurricane hits. give notice to all illegal immigrants they will have to serve in the armed forces for 2 years and defend the us... once theyve done that they should automatically be granted citizenship in the us.. if they refuse leave them abroad. BTW im kidding about the ditch thing.
make all people who arent disabled who are on welfare pay back what they have gotten from us taxpayers by either doing community service, serving in the armed forces etc.
make all children entering high school take mandatory drug screens once a month, if they test positive their parents should have to pay stiff fines, imagine how much money we could save on health care cutting down on drug addictions
whether our goverment is democrat controlled or republican they cant do anything right do you really want our goverment controlling health care?

does anyone have stats on how many troups were killed during the 8 yrs of the bush admistration vs 8 yrs of the clinton administration?
sorry to push everyones buttons and push this way off topic but its been great entertainment reading everyones opinions..
and yes ill be voting for Mccain only because to me he is the lesser of 2 evils. from what i can gather Obamas tax increases affect people making 30-60 grand more than people making more than 125 grand. ( I currently make about 45 grand a year Ive been a homeowner since 1991, I managed to pay off my mortgage by working 60 hrs a week for over 20 yrs. id rather the government not penalize me for working hard and investing in various stocks and bonds)
I agree with others saying our 2 party system is broken but if we did manage to get a 3rd party the media wouldnt give them any air time or would snuff them out before they could get popular. people always say CNN is biased liberal and Fox is biased conservative but from what i can see Cnn is far more liberal than Fox is conservative. lets not even talk about MSNBC.. can anyone say AGENDA?
Keith Olberman ought to be shot he is so biased.
im the utmostjamin1 and i aprove of this message

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-13-2008, 04:04 PM
This thread is really pissing me off! Did you include Sir T. that obtaining a fake SS number is ILLEGAL??? in your defense of the poor illegal alien? Did you mention that Identity theft is ILLEGAL??? How do know some illegal alien doesn't have YOUR DL number or SS number? If my identity was stolen, my finances damaged, or my credit rating damaged and I found the person responsible, that person would suffer serious consequences. And this bit about Mexicans doing the jobs Americans don't want to do? WTF??? First of all, who said? We've got people illegally obtaining Welfare checks who could be doing the jobs "Americans don't want to do". That's fvckin' bullsh!t! All of these assumptions you and others make are YOUR OWN OPINION!!! And you'll just continue to bully anyone who doesn't agree with you with your own opinions that you state as facts until they give up and move on. I've seen plenty of examples in your posts dude.

This is ABSOLUTELY 100% correct. But Sir T says they ARE paying taxes with ILLEGALLY OBTAINED IDENTITIES!!! That makes it okay right? How sad.

Here's one that just KILLS me:

What do you consider "their fair share" T? You're knocking JSE's remark with your own opinion. Give me some hard facts showing what their fair share is supposed to be. I'll be the first to admit that corporate greed is one aspect of Capitalism that keeps poor people poor and other classes from getting ahead, but as has been the case for years and years, the party that promotes change is using hollow words just as a means to an end. And let's not ignore the fact that the economy is cyclic. It doesn't matter who's in office. BTW, the dollar is gaining strength, and oil prices are dropping like a rock. Do we have Obama's ideas for "change" to thank for that?

Really? What's his name? What's the Hotel Management firm's name? Got a phone number so I can verify your relationship to him? I say bullsh!t.

Again you're making statements about illegals paying taxes based on ILLEGALLY obtained identities. Don't you see what you're typing?
And in closing T, if you want to ignore anything I say other than the cute little wisecracks we trade that's fine. You're WAY too opinionated for my taste.

No Rich, I am not going to do what you just did, you know, not use a single brain cell and just call everything I said bull****. Nope, not going to do it. But buddy, you are part of the problem. Shouting, and getting all emotional, telling others that their opinion is nothing in this kind of discussion is unhelpful. We are both intelligent, and should be able to discuss this in a civil and respectful manner. You are not all right, and I am not all wrong. But really man, you have the communicative finesse of a three year old. This is far too much into emotions, and really lacking in critical thinking. When you enter a conversation with all of this emotional bombast, there is only one direction it will go. That is down.

So please do not twist what I say, and use it to shape your emotional outburst. I never advocated that it is right to steal other peoples identities, I just mentioned it was done. I do not condone illegals immigrants contributing taxes or to SS that way, I just mentioned it was done. I never asked anyone to post anyone private information for everyone to see just because I do not agree with what a person says. I quiet as it is kept, you posted nothing that disputes what I have said, you just blew up. And please do not lecture me about challenging someone information with opinion when you just did the same thing yourself.

Everyone else is discussing this topic in a very civil manner. I am not trying to beat anyone down just because I do not agree with what they say. I am just enjoying an intelligent engagement on a complex and very difficult issue to sort out. We can agree with one another, or disagree, but we certainly do not have to $hit all over each other to make our points.

Rich-n-Texas
08-13-2008, 04:08 PM
I got off my chest what I needed to get off my chest. I'm fvckin done here.

bobsticks
08-13-2008, 04:15 PM
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Sir Terrence the Terrible again.


props for civility...

Groundbeef
08-13-2008, 04:18 PM
Where's Melvin? We could use a good whippin' boy right now.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-13-2008, 06:11 PM
Call it what you want but it's the only way to fairly resolve the issue within our current tax system. The rich can complain all they want. Tough ****!

I agree with this. But unfortunately, the wealthy have the politicians in their back pocket, and the American public has checked out of the system, but loves to complain about it. Personally the rich are not complaining as long as we have leaders that give them tax cuts when they really do not need it. For the record, I am one of those that Obama's tax increases will effect, and I have no problem paying my fair share into the system. I came to that point when I told my accountant to STOP looking for loopholes and just tell me what I owe when the process is finished. I am very over the greed that drives one who makes enough money, but works and messages the system to get more.




Just to be clear, I think they are both blowhard idiots. I was just using Obama as an example. They are two politicians just like the many before them. I'm tired of politicians but unfortunately in todays election process we only get to choose the least offensive pawn. And thinking what Obama says is idealistic is not just because myself or someone else is scared of change or something new. I want change just as much as you but again these pawns are not going to be the ones to do it. And for the record, I don't get my news from CNN or Fox.

I guess I am more hopeful than skeptical. I do not think any one person will have the momentum or power to change a long standing entrenchment of dogma(that's my realistic mode), but my hope is that the process will start here and can be built on. I do not support Obama because I think he is the cure to what ails all, I am supporting him because he has not been in the Senate for twenty six years contributing to exactly the problems we now face.


I have actually read Obama website from "page to page" over the last few months and I am basing my opions partly on his own words. Maybe you should take a lool at McCain and R. Paul's website for some balance to your savior. I'm not saying either of them are right on all topics but I sure do like of lot of Paul's ideas. Too bad he has no chance in hell of making any further waves.

Do not assume that I haven't read both Pauls and McCains page. I have read those, Obama's, Clintons, the quack Gulianni's when he was running, Richardson and Edwards when they were running, and Huckabee's as well. I have paid more attention to this election than I have paid to the last three. Since I do not vote strictly down party lines, I give all candidates my ears and eyes. You are right, Paul has some great ideas, but he also has some very bad ones as well, just like all of the others.

JSE, no human is my savior, so let's brush that kind of dialog out of the picture.



I think we are actually on the same side here. I am all for more research. I'm just being realistic in saying solar and wind are not the answers to solve our energy problems. They will help but we need other alternatives. Even T. Boone admits this! And, I'm guessing T-Boone has his hand the pot somewhere. That's just T Boone's way.

Actually solar and wind are the answers looking ahead. What needs to be done is to develop those technologies along with other NON OIL based energy based products. If we keep pushing oil, then we are going to stay stuck right where we are. There is a historical precedence for my thoughts. They go back to the oil crises of the 70's. Back then when the Saudi's cut us off, we began to jump all over smaller more fuel efficient cars and other energy technologies(like the electric car) only to abandon it once the Saudi's graciously decided they had punished us enough. Since we do not have enough oil to make us energy independent, then we must focus our energy on finding technologies that are home grown, and safe for the environment(which oil is not on any level).



We absolutely need to explore other energy alternatives but we also need to focus on the here and now and the hear and now is OIL! We're going to need a lot of it over the next 50 to 100years.

We do not have 50 to 100 years of oil anywhere that is easily reachable. We have already gotten all of the oil that is cheap and easy to get out of the ground. Many experts have stated such. If we are still depending on oil 50 to 100 years from now, then we are a failure. In 50 to 100 years this country could be completely off oil, and on to something else entirely. The bottom line is we do not have enough oil under our control to satisfy our needs for anything close to 50 to 100 years, so there is no use in spending valuable resources in chasing that pipe dream. If we drilled everywhere we could, we still would not acheive our energy needs, so what would be the point in sticking to oil as a basis of our energy policy?



These are also based on a false number of illegal aliens in the country. No politician wants to admit the real number which by some reports might likely be almost double the "official" number. I'll accept that many illegal aliens pay taxes but I cannot agree that the "windfall" SS money is more than what the true cost of illegal immigration is in terms of money, resources, free healthcare, government programs, and the loss of reported taxable income.

Since nobody really knows what the number is, how can you say their estimates are false? And how can we really assume its double?(it could be, but its not verified) Even if it is double, the fact is they are contributing 7 billion to SS annually(and it appears to be increasing), and the IRS is reporting an annual increase in filing using taxpayer ID numbers which is what they use when you do not have a SS number. From what I have read, they are contributing billions in payroll taxes, hundreds of millions in medicare taxes(we all pay them), hundreds of millions in state taxes, contributing millions into disability funds, all money they will not get back in benefits. And if we bring their contribution to consumer spending, one could argue they are offsetting the cost of them being here. I however am not going to make that argument. The bottom line is if we took estimates on how many laborors we are going to need to drive this economy going forward, and put it up against our birth rate, it is clear we are going to need far more laborors than we are currently producing. It is also clear that just throwing them out will cause such a financial mess, that it would take years maybe decades (or never) to offset the loss in labor force, and we would be really sticking a dagger in our own hearts. We wanted cheap labor, and we got it, and the problems that go with it. We wanted cheap products, we got them, and now we have no manufacturing base if an emergency required us to become fully self reliant.


I did not mention one State. I mentioned Texas "or any other border state". Of course county hospitals are for people who do not have insurance. However, they are for US citizens without insurance. Not illegal aliens. E/R visits jumped for the rich. What's your point? Are the rich not allowed to get injured?

Unfortunately illegals are here, and they do not have insurance either. So once again, we have a tough choice. Deny them medical help, and have all kinds of diseases left untreated, and running through the public, contact our government and tell them to revoke EMTALA, and we get all kinds of diseases running through the public, or tell the government that if they are going to require EMTALA, they should pay for it, which would motivate them to get a immigration policy legislated pronto. Or, we could ship them all out and cry tommorrow when we cannot get affordable housing, or the cost of a meal or hotel room becomes out of reach, or you cannot find a nanny, babysitter, dishwasher, fruit picker, maid, or somebody to bone meat in packing plant, or do low skilled repetative work all for minimum wage. There has to be some kind of in between solution, because drastic steps going any direction are not going to be very beneficial in the long run, that is for sure.

As far as the rich using the ER, I am not knocking them for it, but adding that they are a component in the mix that must be considered when talking about overcrowded ER. Its not just illegals in a vaccum that is creating the problem. We have an aging population, and it is only going to get worse I am afraid. One point that nobody has even added to the equation is that there are 45.8 million legal residents without health insurance as well, and I am sure a health care system was not built to handle that many either. When you have ER closing in areas where there is no large population of illegal immigrants, that points to a larger issue than just illegal immigration.


And yes, many times you can tell who is illegal. No SS#, No TDL? At least in Texas chances are they are not legal. And who said I am assuming "EVERYONE" from a certain race is illegal just because some are. Could not be farther from the truth. The fact is that hispanics makes up the majority of illegal aliens. Just a fact. I know a lot of E/R doctors through my wife's work. I am friend with many of them. They have told me first hand the E/R's are being used on a daily basis by illegal aliens. People without health insurance use the E/R in place of a primary doctor. That is fine for citizens. Not so much for illegal aliens. County hospitals were not intended to support the healthcare needs of illegal aliens.

Then when an illegal alien gets hurt, or catches a disease where do they go if they cannot make it back their home country? The legal population is at risk at that point. If you let them die in the streets, then morgues are overloaded. If you just burn their bodies, then human rights organizations are all over you. If you throw up fences on the border, then who will do those low skilled low paying jobs? Here in California are farmers are complaining that they do not have enough help to harvest their crops because of the effects of border security(thank God almighty they are doing something), so fruit is just rotting on the trees. The problem is that THEY ARE HERE NOW, and we have to figure out how to deal with THIS situation as it has played out. We are pointing out problems that do not have easy solutions. We cannot talk about sending them back, we cannot talk about keeping them out(they are already here), and they are so sewn in to our economic fabric, we have to take into account of what life would be like if they were not here to do our low skilled low paying jobs. None of this is particularly easy to figure out, and knee jerk, overly emotional solutions will most definately backfire in our faces.



Agree 100%. See my above comments about Blowhard Idiot Politicians. What's the saying? Never trust a politician?

I guess we can also say, never trust ourselves, because we sent them to Washington.


I hope your not grouping me in that category. I thought you knew me better than that. Like Sticks mentioned, I think it's more about paying your share and being a felow citizen and living under the same "burden" as the rest of us. I could care less about race in terms of illegal immigration. Just come here legally. If you want to stay, I will show you where to get in line and I will even buy the first round of beer afterwards. Hell, I'll even buy them a beer just to get them in line.

I am not grouping ANYONE into any catagory on this board, so do not take what I said as a personal assesment, we are just discussing a issue. I do know you better than that. I agree, it is about paying our fair share, but there is no way I am naive enough to take race off the shelf. It does not have to be a prejudicial I dislike you thing, but it could be a power division thing. Let's face it, republicans do not want CERTAIN illegals to become legal because they (and I am speaking of latins from south of our borders) tend to vote democrat as opposed to my peeps the Cubans (without me of course) which tend to vote republican. This is why they scream when one group jumps a fence, and excuse another when they hit our shores. Democrats are willing to obsorb 12-20 million folks because they see political gain. There is a racial component to both of these perspectives, and that is what I was referring to.

In looking at this issue, I am not the knee jerk type because of the complexity of the issue. There are no easy answers to this period. The bottom line is everyone, including you and I turn a blind eye to this for too many years, and now we are seeking a quick fix to make it go away. Its not going to happen. Cutting off public services could potientially endanger the legal public. Sending them ALL back is definately going to cause a financial hardship for this country at all fronts. While protecting our borders is extremely important (it is VERY important to me), getting a comprehensive immigration policy is just as important, because we are going to need the low skilled low cost labor to keep our country competitive(how do you compete against the cheap asian labor that China and Japan use?), because we certainly are not producing it ourselves. Some believe that if we sent them back, our own citizens would fill in the gaps. I have my doubts considering that the whole problem got started (at least in California) because farmers could not find workers of legal status to work in the fields. This was back in the fifties, and with the influx of migrant workers, the problem went away, but created more.

It wasn't but a year ago I was being called a "traidor" or "una marioneta de un gobierno racista blanco" (that is a traitor for those who didn't catch the simularity, and a puppet of a racist white government on the latter) because I didn't like the way illegal immigrants (who ethnically are my brothers and sisters) were pushing their agenda. I took a very hard line against what they were doing, and I was relentless in expressing the fact that Mexico does not allow folks south of its borders into their country, so why should we let them into ours? A year later, after reading and hearing both sides of the argument, my opinion didn't change, but my tone softened dramatically because I realized this issue is so complex, deeply rooted, and there are some very unattractive components in some arguements, that it require far more than a knee jerk response to deal with it.


My own little way of combating illegal immigration! :arf:

LOL, go boy!

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-13-2008, 06:21 PM
props for civility...

The lost art, civil discourse.

robertblonde
08-13-2008, 06:27 PM
go ps3 its that master system that the hardware players have to match, there may be more connections on standalone players, there designed with the minimum hardware needed to play blue ray, when yours bored from movies theres the games some play like movies
ps3 ,hdmi out to a new reciever that will decode the dobly true hd ,dts hd,etc, be carefull
some new recievers only take the pcm from hdmi, not the bitstream {denon 2808,3808 would be good choices}

kexodusc
08-14-2008, 06:52 AM
Wow, Kex goes to Chi-town for a few days and a whole political revolution breaks out on the Ar.com forums.

Sigh...reading the comments here reminds me why I did a reverse-biblical exodus of my own - left the states for the provinces.. (bah-dum-bum). Nah, I kid, I kid...that was pureley financially motivated - and maybe for the beer too.

A few points:
1) I now live and finally can vote in a country that has a 4 or 5 major political parties - know what? the 3rd, 4th, and 5th choices ain't any better. Seriously - what the politicians do is amazing - they find a cause to rally their troops - all this does is turn the people against each other - the ugly side of democracy. They will segregate you based on religion, race, region, or left/right alignment of the political spectrum. There can be no compromise without looking soft to their core members. So they become champions of being different but not champions of change or progress.
Why? Because a political party is a machine. It's purpose is to look after its own special interest. It sells a product - the product is "policy". It competes for customers, but it invests its resources where it sees the highest return on capital, not necessarily where the Nation (the market) would see the highest return on capital.
Here in Canada there is more choice, but IMHO less substance one way or the other. The ideas become watered down, and process and bureaucracy grows. And Canada's nowhere near as bad as some of the European countries with thier political "coalitions" and deadlocked parliaments.
In my humble, mine-all-mine, not-an-expert opinion, the two party system is as efficient as it gets. The problem is the politicical movements have adapted and mastered the game of democracy. Another party won't solve that unless we can honestly believe that party will be free of all the crap that comes with being a political party.

2) The two parties are full of idiots. Differentiation (by that I mean having a position on an issue different than "the other party" remains more important that civil progress. Style over substance. This is the biggest reason our...err...your two parties fail you. Know what? It's just as bad everywhere else from what I can tell. But it's better than ruled by a tyrant...mostly.

3) Illegal aliens...It's probably not fair to blame the government when cheap-skate citizens like me where creating the demand for cheap labour, then turning around complaining about it.

But...yeah, they gots to pay their fair share when they start using serivces. Part of the problem is the immigration process. My wife became a Canadian citizen waaaaaaay faster than any of my relatives became US citizens even 20 years ago. No excuse for it. Most of us are descendants of immigrants who didn't have to wait a decade to become American. It seems sorta hypocritical to say "we got in fast and it worked out great for us, but you guys have to wait in line". Maybe I'm wrong on this again, but it seems to me both parties have said a lot on the matter but have done very little. It's not exactly a new issue.

4) Obama vs McCain? My opinion - sit back and enjoy democracy and rest assured that no matter what happens, the next 4 years are going to be a big improvement over the last 8. It's only a question of priorities and the means to the end. In 2012, you'll go at it again, and America will still be there. America is, was, and always will be defined by her people, not the politicians it elects. Some how things will work out.

5) If I were voting in the US this time around, my only criteria would be to select a politician that establish and build on relationships with the international community - the rest of the world is catching up and America is no longer as important a player as it once was - think the whole world is going to need to re-learn the fine art of diplomacy going forward, it'll be more improtant to make friends than enemies, and that's not something the current administration has done as well as previous Democratic or Republican presidents.
I'm not sure whether Obama or McCain is best suited for that. That's up to you guys to decide this time. But those two guys have a lot more style and character than the boring nerds we have leading the political parties up here.

Thanks for the entertaining read...flame on.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-14-2008, 08:53 AM
...to respond properly to wisdom like:

Let's start off with a few specifics:



Yes, we're gonna have to make some hard decisions but, once again, the moderate middle and pundits for fair and responsible government are shut out. Why is there no middleground in this conversation. Why is it that the conversation must be between a tax cut and a thirty percent raise?

Here is the rub. I just read this morning that three quarters of all business doing business in this country, didn't pay a dime of taxes between 1998-2005. In that same report, they also stated that most millionares and billionares didn't pay what they actually owe because of loopholes in the tax system. I do think there is a middle ground, and I have put myself right there with my money. Pay what you owe. No loopholes, or ways out, just pay what you owe. I have done that myself, and if all the companies, wealthy and ultra wealthy did the same, there would be no need of any increases whatsoever.


We need to look at the way we raise and allocate tax dollars. Recognize that a ridiculous amount of expenditures are added to the budget through sub-additions to bills. This is the so-called "pork barreling". This is how we get amendments to crime bills that allocate funds to scientific research on the consistency of ketchup. We need line-item-veto. (Wanna get mad? Check out a report from the OMB and look at what we actually pay for.)

Totally agree here. Keep in mind. The thrust for pork barreling is coming from the American public, not just from the politicians. We demand the freeway overpasses who's funding is inserted in a crime or agri bill. Our expectations have to change is order to get a politicians perspective to change. In a democracy, the buck starts with the public demands. Somebody other than a politician wanted the "road to nowhere" built. Could it be that the citizens of Ketchikan just wanted a easier way to get to their airport?


For that you're you need only to look to the candidate representing the middle ground...oh yeah, he/she ain't around because that person would be educated, making them unpalletable to the Far-Right and would insist that people get up in the morning and go to work...a foreign concept to the Far-Left. Of course your Congressman might support that candidate...right after they convince the guy that works in the meth lab to support stauncher sentences on crystal abusers.

You are right, we don't have anyone in the middle(where 99% of the solutions are found), and I think our own citizenery are partly to blame for this. If we as Americans were not so locked into parties, and vote straight down party lines without any consideration that answers are not straight down party lines, we would get better results from our leaders. If the public would get more educated and engaged in the system, our politicians would not, and could not get away with what they are doing. If we didn't respond to the political theater that goes on, it wouldn't happen. We partially feed into this madness, but do not want to take responsibility for the mess it has created. We like to point to Washington and blame them for everything, when it is us who sent them there. Interesting tibit I heard the other day. While the congressional approval level of congress sits below twenty percent, everyone seems to believe that THEIR congress person is not part of the problem. We live in the era of "its the other persons fault, not mine".


Well not so much...and kinda. Terrence has done a comendable job addressing some of the fallacies regarding the contributions that aliens make to the society, and payroll taxes are a huge contribution that seems to be constantly overlooked. That said,...um...




Yeah, not so much...

http://www.rense.com/general63/emta.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJxmJZXgNI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDjZ6gzo0C4
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?threadid=335407
http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=4197

aw, hell...http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hospitals+closed+shut+down+illegal+immigrants&btnG=Search

By the way the insurance companies love this stuff. For everyone of these cases they can raise costs exponentially ($25 asprin anyone?). Kinda like a fire in Ash Shu'aybah can result in a 0.30 rise in the price per barrel of oil. It's disproportionate.

After reading a few of these articles, I wonder if the problem is in the policy, or in the illegals. If hospitals were alllowed to turn away those that could not pay, then they would stay in business, and we would be flooded with sick folks on the streets. If they pay for the care of the uninsured, then it would bankrupt the government. These kinds of choices are a result of no immigration policy, and I am not sure we can blame that squarely on illegals. There is another rub I pointed out, we have 45.8 million legal residents that are also uninsured that are in this mix as well, so can we really just lock this all on illegals? Are we cursing their existance, while enjoying the fruits they bring? I think so. So we kinda are sending ourselves a mix message?



Hell yeah, bruh and that number just rose by one. I just cancelled my health insurance and plan on denying the E-unit my SS next time. I'm an illegal from Greenland, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

LOL. Too funny.




Or, maybe it's that folks want everyone to bear the burden equally, the rights and responsibilities of citizenry. Yes, we have established that illegal immigrants pay some taxes to a larger degree than is publicly held. At the same time the burdens in the medical, academic and law enforcement areas are significant. If the problems are systemic you search for systemic solutions, not ones based on a "wanna pay-don't wanna pay" basis cuz nobody wants to pay. I would prefer that we all contribute than return to the days of midwives and leeches.

So we are clear here, I am not champion of illegal immigration, I am with a more rational mind quite against it. My grandmother came here from England legally. She paid her money, she waited her time, and she did this the right way. My grandfather came here from Cuba the wrong way(but according to US policy he could stay), learned english, paid his money, waited his time, and got his citizenship. So hell no, I do not want anyone to be able to jump a fence, and get all of the benefits that my grandparents had to wait, pay, and work for. Just like you, I would like everyone paying their fair share. However, it is impossible for illegals to get health insurance either through their employers(part of hiring an illegal is not have to pay the associated cost of hiring a legal one), and they do not make enough money to pay it out of pocket. So while they are here making it cheaper for us to stay in hotels, go to restaurants, and keep our food prices in check, what do they do? I think all of western society has to ask themselves this question, since just about everyone in western society is relying on cheap low skilled immigrant labor to fuel their economies. We alone cannot supply all of the workers we need to fuel our economy going foward, our birth rate doesn't support it. So what we have here, is private business loving cheap labor, angry legal Americans feeling the pinch, and the federal government loving the windfall tax benefit from both payroll and SS taxes. Clearly the government and businesses have a very different agenda than the public at large.


On that basis alone I would respectfully submit that Shikha Dalmia can shove his "Denying public services to people who pay their taxes is an affront to America's bedrock belief in fairness. But many "pull-up-the-drawbridge" politicians want to do just that when it comes to illegal immigrants" rhetoric up his ass.

Bam!


It isn't always about race T, sometimes it's about standing in line with the rest of us. I'm surprised GMichael hasn't weighed in on this.

I agree its about standing in line, but the race component is always in the picture, but not from the typical slant. As I outlined to JSE, race can be used to acheive more power. Republicans would love for my peeps to reach these shores because they typically vote their direction. They absolutely do not want my fellow Latino's from the south in this country, because they usually vote democrat. The democrats will sell the farm to get more latino voters, so they are just as dangerous. Not the typical bias/hate/predjudice slant, but an opportunity for a power grab.



Absolutely. He's the worst kind of party hack, backpedaling into the prevailing winds of convenience. He's like a less-mean Sesame Street version of Cheney. On the other hand, massive tax increases will do nothing to spur economic growth nor will they do anything to promote American owned businesses...there's really not any guarantee that the revenues will be used to balance the budget either. Obama can promise this as much as he wants but Congress will ratify whatever budget it wants...and override any veto that threatened its pork-barrel self-interests.

We have to be clear that this is a targeted tax increase on the large corporations and wealthy folks, the very folks who have benefitted most from the Bobble head Bush's tax cuts. He just wants to roll back that gift, not just increase everyone's taxes. He wants to give a tax cut to lower and middle class folks who need them the most. Under his plan, I am going to get a hike, but I do not mind one bit. I believe its fair since I got a cut I didn't need in the first place.


You want a thirty percent tax increase? I got one word for ya...Europe. No thanks. That's just trading one set of problems for another and, frankly, I don't think we need to give people less of an incentive to go to work (see European unemployment figures)...

I do not think the Euro way would fit here too well. However you gotta admit, having universal health care, and a paid for college education is not a bad deal. They seem to be pretty happy with it when you discuss the issue with them. I was talking to a French couple the other day, and they really like their universal health care program very much.



As an aside, there has been some discussion of McCain pledging to a one-term Presidency. To these political sensibilities that's something that Obama supporters should be very afraid of. It'll cost McCain nothing in party goodwill and would energize the following groups:
1) people that don't like taxes
2) moderates of both parties that are on the fence
3) people with health/age concerns
4) rascists
5) Hillary supporters

Just a thought...and one that makes me wistful for the idea of a viable third party.

Man, I would like a third party myself, I personally am not a big fan of the current system, and most pointedly, the voting system. I do agree with you on this point big time.



so gutter

I don't like it down there, you can't see anything.

JSE
08-14-2008, 03:47 PM
I agree with this. But unfortunately, the wealthy have the politicians in their back pocket, and the American public has checked out of the system, but loves to complain about it. Personally the rich are not complaining as long as we have leaders that give them tax cuts when they really do not need it. For the record, I am one of those that Obama's tax increases will effect, and I have no problem paying my fair share into the system. I came to that point when I told my accountant to STOP looking for loopholes and just tell me what I owe when the process is finished. I am very over the greed that drives one who makes enough money, but works and messages the system to get more.





I guess I am more hopeful than skeptical. I do not think any one person will have the momentum or power to change a long standing entrenchment of dogma(that's my realistic mode), but my hope is that the process will start here and can be built on. I do not support Obama because I think he is the cure to what ails all, I am supporting him because he has not been in the Senate for twenty six years contributing to exactly the problems we now face.



Do not assume that I haven't read both Pauls and McCains page. I have read those, Obama's, Clintons, the quack Gulianni's when he was running, Richardson and Edwards when they were running, and Huckabee's as well. I have paid more attention to this election than I have paid to the last three. Since I do not vote strictly down party lines, I give all candidates my ears and eyes. You are right, Paul has some great ideas, but he also has some very bad ones as well, just like all of the others.

JSE, no human is my savior, so let's brush that kind of dialog out of the picture.




Actually solar and wind are the answers looking ahead. What needs to be done is to develop those technologies along with other NON OIL based energy based products. If we keep pushing oil, then we are going to stay stuck right where we are. There is a historical precedence for my thoughts. They go back to the oil crises of the 70's. Back then when the Saudi's cut us off, we began to jump all over smaller more fuel efficient cars and other energy technologies(like the electric car) only to abandon it once the Saudi's graciously decided they had punished us enough. Since we do not have enough oil to make us energy independent, then we must focus our energy on finding technologies that are home grown, and safe for the environment(which oil is not on any level).




We do not have 50 to 100 years of oil anywhere that is easily reachable. We have already gotten all of the oil that is cheap and easy to get out of the ground. Many experts have stated such. If we are still depending on oil 50 to 100 years from now, then we are a failure. In 50 to 100 years this country could be completely off oil, and on to something else entirely. The bottom line is we do not have enough oil under our control to satisfy our needs for anything close to 50 to 100 years, so there is no use in spending valuable resources in chasing that pipe dream. If we drilled everywhere we could, we still would not acheive our energy needs, so what would be the point in sticking to oil as a basis of our energy policy?




Since nobody really knows what the number is, how can you say their estimates are false? And how can we really assume its double?(it could be, but its not verified) Even if it is double, the fact is they are contributing 7 billion to SS annually(and it appears to be increasing), and the IRS is reporting an annual increase in filing using taxpayer ID numbers which is what they use when you do not have a SS number. From what I have read, they are contributing billions in payroll taxes, hundreds of millions in medicare taxes(we all pay them), hundreds of millions in state taxes, contributing millions into disability funds, all money they will not get back in benefits. And if we bring their contribution to consumer spending, one could argue they are offsetting the cost of them being here. I however am not going to make that argument. The bottom line is if we took estimates on how many laborors we are going to need to drive this economy going forward, and put it up against our birth rate, it is clear we are going to need far more laborors than we are currently producing. It is also clear that just throwing them out will cause such a financial mess, that it would take years maybe decades (or never) to offset the loss in labor force, and we would be really sticking a dagger in our own hearts. We wanted cheap labor, and we got it, and the problems that go with it. We wanted cheap products, we got them, and now we have no manufacturing base if an emergency required us to become fully self reliant.



Unfortunately illegals are here, and they do not have insurance either. So once again, we have a tough choice. Deny them medical help, and have all kinds of diseases left untreated, and running through the public, contact our government and tell them to revoke EMTALA, and we get all kinds of diseases running through the public, or tell the government that if they are going to require EMTALA, they should pay for it, which would motivate them to get a immigration policy legislated pronto. Or, we could ship them all out and cry tommorrow when we cannot get affordable housing, or the cost of a meal or hotel room becomes out of reach, or you cannot find a nanny, babysitter, dishwasher, fruit picker, maid, or somebody to bone meat in packing plant, or do low skilled repetative work all for minimum wage. There has to be some kind of in between solution, because drastic steps going any direction are not going to be very beneficial in the long run, that is for sure.

As far as the rich using the ER, I am not knocking them for it, but adding that they are a component in the mix that must be considered when talking about overcrowded ER. Its not just illegals in a vaccum that is creating the problem. We have an aging population, and it is only going to get worse I am afraid. One point that nobody has even added to the equation is that there are 45.8 million legal residents without health insurance as well, and I am sure a health care system was not built to handle that many either. When you have ER closing in areas where there is no large population of illegal immigrants, that points to a larger issue than just illegal immigration.



Then when an illegal alien gets hurt, or catches a disease where do they go if they cannot make it back their home country? The legal population is at risk at that point. If you let them die in the streets, then morgues are overloaded. If you just burn their bodies, then human rights organizations are all over you. If you throw up fences on the border, then who will do those low skilled low paying jobs? Here in California are farmers are complaining that they do not have enough help to harvest their crops because of the effects of border security(thank God almighty they are doing something), so fruit is just rotting on the trees. The problem is that THEY ARE HERE NOW, and we have to figure out how to deal with THIS situation as it has played out. We are pointing out problems that do not have easy solutions. We cannot talk about sending them back, we cannot talk about keeping them out(they are already here), and they are so sewn in to our economic fabric, we have to take into account of what life would be like if they were not here to do our low skilled low paying jobs. None of this is particularly easy to figure out, and knee jerk, overly emotional solutions will most definately backfire in our faces.




I guess we can also say, never trust ourselves, because we sent them to Washington.



I am not grouping ANYONE into any catagory on this board, so do not take what I said as a personal assesment, we are just discussing a issue. I do know you better than that. I agree, it is about paying our fair share, but there is no way I am naive enough to take race off the shelf. It does not have to be a prejudicial I dislike you thing, but it could be a power division thing. Let's face it, republicans do not want CERTAIN illegals to become legal because they (and I am speaking of latins from south of our borders) tend to vote democrat as opposed to my peeps the Cubans (without me of course) which tend to vote republican. This is why they scream when one group jumps a fence, and excuse another when they hit our shores. Democrats are willing to obsorb 12-20 million folks because they see political gain. There is a racial component to both of these perspectives, and that is what I was referring to.

In looking at this issue, I am not the knee jerk type because of the complexity of the issue. There are no easy answers to this period. The bottom line is everyone, including you and I turn a blind eye to this for too many years, and now we are seeking a quick fix to make it go away. Its not going to happen. Cutting off public services could potientially endanger the legal public. Sending them ALL back is definately going to cause a financial hardship for this country at all fronts. While protecting our borders is extremely important (it is VERY important to me), getting a comprehensive immigration policy is just as important, because we are going to need the low skilled low cost labor to keep our country competitive(how do you compete against the cheap asian labor that China and Japan use?), because we certainly are not producing it ourselves. Some believe that if we sent them back, our own citizens would fill in the gaps. I have my doubts considering that the whole problem got started (at least in California) because farmers could not find workers of legal status to work in the fields. This was back in the fifties, and with the influx of migrant workers, the problem went away, but created more.

It wasn't but a year ago I was being called a "traidor" or "una marioneta de un gobierno racista blanco" (that is a traitor for those who didn't catch the simularity, and a puppet of a racist white government on the latter) because I didn't like the way illegal immigrants (who ethnically are my brothers and sisters) were pushing their agenda. I took a very hard line against what they were doing, and I was relentless in expressing the fact that Mexico does not allow folks south of its borders into their country, so why should we let them into ours? A year later, after reading and hearing both sides of the argument, my opinion didn't change, but my tone softened dramatically because I realized this issue is so complex, deeply rooted, and there are some very unattractive components in some arguements, that it require far more than a knee jerk response to deal with it.



LOL, go boy!

Dammit T! These long post are killing me.

Let's just agree your wrong and I'm right as usual and end it before my freaking eyes pop out of my head. :thumbsup: :cornut:

GMichael
08-15-2008, 05:19 AM
Dammit T! These long post are killing me.

Let's just agree your wrong and I'm right as usual and end it before my freaking eyes pop out of my head. :thumbsup: :cornut:

Stop that!

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-17-2008, 08:04 AM
Dammit T! These long post are killing me.

Let's just agree your wrong and I'm right as usual and end it before my freaking eyes pop out of my head. :thumbsup: :cornut:

Okay......Now I am going to Chi town! I was getting tired.....

bobsticks
08-17-2008, 08:16 AM
Okay......Now I am going to Chi town! I was getting tired.....

When you gonna be in the Windy City, T?

bobsticks
08-17-2008, 08:56 AM
Here is the rub. I just read this morning that three quarters of all business doing business in this country, didn't pay a dime of taxes between 1998-2005. In that same report, they also stated that most millionares and billionares didn't pay what they actually owe because of loopholes in the tax system.

I won't outright dispute this but I think that it might be overstated. For instance, I know that some of the major corps on the forbes list didn't pay taxes---because they operated at a loss; airlines anyone? I know that my company pays a hefty tax on income but does, in fact, get a substantial break on maintaining properties stateside. In the longrun this may be the cost of doing business as the decision-makers (readrofiteer barons)have displayed no apprehension at moving the means of production overseas. If this is what it takes to keep American jobs here then I may have to come out in favor of it. 'Course, thus far it ain't workin' too well.

As the sunset fades on the American omnipotence in manufacturing we may find it benificial to reconsider some of the open-trade deals we have with the rest of the world. Frankly, as a nation of consumers I'm not sure that it's not our strongest weapon.

"Hi, China? Yeah, it's Sam. Yeah, right. So hey, we've been talkin' it over and as your number one importer we've decided to levy a seven percent tax on everything comin' off the boats in trade for all those intellectual property rights you...well, stole...over the last few decades. What? Yer gonna match that tarrif on Cadillacs. Okay. we'll pay it on all seven of 'em that y'all take...ere'body Wang Chung tonight,See Ya..."

Now as to your point on millionares and billionares, I couldn't agree more. The uber-wealthy are gonna have to take a hit on this but, again, I think we need to be careful to watch the line of demarcation and it's effects on entrepeurialsm. Obama's tax plan (and we'll discuss that more later) would hit some areas that maybe best left alone. Maybe we have to look at breaks for business operators that support employees.


Workers currently pay Social Security taxes on the first $90,000 of their wages. Some people have suggested that the cap be raised or even eliminated altogether. The result would be the largest tax increase in U.S. history, $541 billion in new taxes over the first five years alone. That tax increase would fall primarily, not on the superrich, but on many upper-middle-class families and small businesses. Many experts believe that such an enormous tax increase would hurt the U.S. economy and cost millions of jobs. Even worse, it would do relatively little to fix Social Security. Studies show that removing the tax cap altogether would extend the solvency of Social Security by only seven years. http://www.socialsecurity.org/reformandyou/faqs.html#5

That's the CATO Institute T, not Rush Limbaugh.



So we are clear here, I am not champion of illegal immigration,

You dont come off as an unabashed supporter of illegal immigrants, my friend who I now call the Brown Buffalo, just a realist. Your perspective, born of empathy and rational understanding, is still but one perspective. Mine is based on different criteria.

Down south o' heah, in the 'Times truly are "getting hard"' thread I posted a thread, possibly inflammatory, and Auri comes in with an attempt at an ameliorating post. The message was a great one, one of peace and hope, of understanding but theoretical nonetheless. Sometimes I think your posts are the perfect combination of fact and a relentless and restless idealism, no matter how battered by cynicism, showing an embattled will for the "other half-of-the-glass".

I labor under no such pretensions. Maybe because of my job, maybe because of my personality, but I'm gonna look at the endgame and say some things that many recognise but are loath to put into words. And, the truth is that we haven't done everything that we could, or even should, to halt the onslaught of illegal immigration...perhaps for political reasons as you listed, perhaps because of humanitarian reasons. Hell, if we really wanted to stop 80 or 90% of illegal immigration from the south we don't need fences or walls. Just dig a moat thirty feet wide and fifty feet deep and fill that sum***** with sulfuric acid and/or toxic medical waste. Understand, I'm not advocating that we do that, but we could...

...or maybe not. And it's the same humanity, the same optimism, preventing us from doing such a thing that prevents us from daring to admit aloud that some fundamental changes need to be made with the way that we view our country, it's role on the international stage, and, inded, the Constitution itself.

It's time we recognise that, for at least a while, we can't be the caretaker of every Jose, Miguel, and Jorge (or for that matter Sven, Ivan, Ivor, ,Yusuf, and Yakubu). We've hit a population density not of square footage but of input capacity. I don't wanna get all Bell Curve-whack on ya but I don't see alot of nuclear physicist or economics professors coming over through the Rio or across the bay...or from Estonia or Eritrea or England. I'm not sayin' kick everyone out...I'm amenable to discussions of amnesty...but we need to start being particular about who we're allowing in and recognising that we are allowing it.

With the middle class embattled with the largest generation of Americans getting ready to retire, a hostile foreign market, the backlash of COLA debacles of the 70's, a housing and tech bubble and a thousand other conditions I don't think we can afford more hangers-on that don't create wealth.


I'm fully prepared for a history lesson, a civics symposium and a Constitutional lecture...remembering full well that a plain-text reading of that document doesn't acknowledge women, regards "Negros as three-fifths a man", and was around before thirty seven states and a commonwealth.

...and I'm fully prepared to accept that there opposing views probably based righteously on doctrines of international goodwill and human rights, just don't expect me to go gentle into that good night.


I do not think the Euro way would fit here too well. However you gotta admit, having universal health care, and a paid for college education is not a bad deal. They seem to be pretty happy with it when you discuss the issue with them. I was talking to a French couple the other day, and they really like their universal health care program very much

All true, but we're not talking about anypone putting forth a plan that will support sweeping education grants or universal health care. We're talking about massive taxes on the middle class that will result, in best estimates, in merely continuing the current inadequate systems for seven years.

Lotsa stuff to consider and at this point the best advised course of action I've read had been from that venerable Political Theorist 3 Lock Box..."just vote out all incumbants".

kexodusc
08-17-2008, 10:04 AM
Heh heh,don't look now but bobsticks is talkin' all political-like.

...fundamental changes to the Constitution...imagine that!

bobsticks
08-17-2008, 11:26 AM
Heh heh,don't look now but bobsticks is talkin' all political-like.

...fundamental changes to the Constitution...imagine that!

..or maybe we should just recognise its relevance within context and limitations when using it as a reason not to do something.

kexodusc
08-17-2008, 02:58 PM
..or maybe we should just recognise its relevance within context and limitations when using it as a reason not to do something.
Ah ha...a convenient interpretation for a convenient morality. Unless you inconveniently happen to be on the minority on a given matter.
I don't expect it would matter much what was in the Constitution, the general spirit of the document has survived, it's the fine print that gets scrutinized. The problem with posterity is it will always see things differently. No matter what was written, we'd continue to spend far too much time deciding it's real meaning, applying 19th century reasoning here and modern interpretation there.

Maybe Jefferson was right and laws should have had lifespan...that wacky republican.

bobsticks
08-17-2008, 04:37 PM
Ah ha...a convenient interpretation for a convenient morality. Unless you inconveniently happen to be on the minority on a given matter.
I don't expect it would matter much what was in the Constitution, the general spirit of the document has survived, it's the fine print that gets scrutinized. The problem with posterity is it will always see things differently. No matter what was written, we'd continue to spend far too much time deciding it's real meaning, applying 19th century reasoning here and modern interpretation there.

Maybe Jefferson was right and laws should have had lifespan...that wacky republican.

I think the spirit of the thing is one of the most graceful and compelling statements of the rights of man in the long and storied history of politics. At the same time, we, as in America, don't have the capability to sustain the kind of economic power and growth, take care of oare our elderly, and be caretaker to the world's lost.

On our way to Hobbes' Leviathan it might be wise for those interested parties to examine the mathematical realities. It might be time for a break, mayhap the world which seems to enjoy demonizing us anyway should be their own caretakers for a bit.

Hobbes was right and Locke was right...even Marx was right. ..because nations and economies and polities are organic, changing, evolving, ebb and flow.

Recognise that any of the arguments made in this have been of complete self-interest. I would expect a citizen of an impoverished country, a prospective immigrant, or a proponent of One World Order to disagree. It would be in their self interest. The realization that as our country fades, like the British Empire before it, others grow and succeed is common sense. That I would propose taking steps, even seemingly harsh ones, to preserve that dominance doesn't make me evil. It makes me human. Don't hate the playah, hate the game bruh.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-17-2008, 06:22 PM
When you gonna be in the Windy City, T?

Sticks, left friday,coming back tuesday. Then back to the land of false body parts, and personalities.

bobsticks
08-17-2008, 06:49 PM
Shoulda let me know b, just a drive up the road. Coulda had a bevie or three and solved the world's problems...and a walk on the dark side, eh. Plus, I know where all the fake body parts are, woulda felt just like home.

We coulda spared the PS3 community and the world at large our pontificating :D

pixelthis
08-17-2008, 10:11 PM
No Rich, I am not going to do what you just did, you know, not use a single brain cell and just call everything I said bull****. Nope, not going to do it. But buddy, you are part of the problem. Shouting, and getting all emotional, telling others that their opinion is nothing in this kind of discussion is unhelpful. We are both intelligent, and should be able to discuss this in a civil and respectful manner. You are not all right, and I am not all wrong. But really man, you have the communicative finesse of a three year old. This is far too much into emotions, and really lacking in critical thinking. When you enter a conversation with all of this emotional bombast, there is only one direction it will go. That is down.

So please do not twist what I say, and use it to shape your emotional outburst. I never advocated that it is right to steal other peoples identities, I just mentioned it was done. I do not condone illegals immigrants contributing taxes or to SS that way, I just mentioned it was done. I never asked anyone to post anyone private information for everyone to see just because I do not agree with what a person says. I quiet as it is kept, you posted nothing that disputes what I have said, you just blew up. And please do not lecture me about challenging someone information with opinion when you just did the same thing yourself.

Everyone else is discussing this topic in a very civil manner. I am not trying to beat anyone down just because I do not agree with what they say. I am just enjoying an intelligent engagement on a complex and very difficult issue to sort out. We can agree with one another, or disagree, but we certainly do not have to $hit all over each other to make our points.

GOOD FOR YOU, not using brain cells is something you excel at.
People who say that we need to "get away from oil" are basically
refugees from the short yellow schoolbus.
How about getting away from food while we're at it? Or air?
We dont live in the "space age," computer age", or "atomic age", we
live in the HYDROCARBON AGE.
EVERYTHING in our modern lives is shaped, madew, powered, or delivered by oil.
TO say that we need to "get away from oil" is like saying bronze age man needed to "get away from bronze".
We have enough hydrocarbon to last until we can get to the gas giants, which are basically made from the stuff.
THE MODERN WORLD is a product of oil, AND ITS GOING TO STAY that way.
To say otherwise is to engage in typical SoCal, greenie, east coast
type liberalism, coming from people who have never worked for a living,
the same people who shipped our infrastructure overseas, thinking we could run a modern economy on Britney spears CD's, TERMINATOR MOVIES, and taking out second mortages on our houses.
The power went off in my house for ten hours the other day, never got an explanation as to why, but trust me, it was grim.
Peeps like sir talky kill me, they have no friggin clue as to the thousands of people who are responsible for their lights coming on everytime they flip a switch, they think they're gonna run a high powered economy on corn starch and "WINDMILLS"
HYDROCARBON IS A fundamental technology, andif it ever goes away, so will about six billion people, because this planet can support about a billion without it, and that is mud huts, grass skirts, and wooden spears.
Of course with sir talkys obsolete HT he probably wont notice:1:

kexodusc
08-18-2008, 04:33 AM
I think the spirit of the thing is one of the most graceful and compelling statements of the rights of man in the long and storied history of politics. At the same time, we, as in America, don't have the capability to sustain the kind of economic power and growth, take care of oare our elderly, and be caretaker to the world's lost.

On our way to Hobbes' Leviathan it might be wise for those interested parties to examine the mathematical realities. It might be time for a break, mayhap the world which seems to enjoy demonizing us anyway should be their own caretakers for a bit.

Yeah, ya gotta live within your means. That's the frustrating part of politics for me. Unsustainable promises from both sides, wrapped in rhetoric.

Interesting last point there...I'm not so sure the world demonizes America - I've travelled to evrery continent except Asia, and was usually treated better abroad than I would be on American soil as a tourist! I really believe that most of the world likes Americans, it's just that from time to time they hate our politicians and hypocritical foreign policy as much as the American voting public does, no different than we treat other foreign political interests. No big deal. I'm sure they'd hate any other globabl superpower as much or more. But let's be honest, we've only been caretaker of the world when it's been in our best interest, not when it's been in the best interest of anyone else. It's not exactly the most genuine thing for us to go looking for praise for it as if it was a charitable donation. Sometimes we got it right, sometimes we got it wrong. I think the rest of the world appreciates the help when it's asked for - it's the guns-a-blazin', you're with us or against us attitude that might rub some the wrong way...and that holds true on and off American soil.

On the flipside, if we didn't get involved as much as we do, just as many on side opposite would be wondering how we could stand idly by...damned if you do, damned if you don't.

For my part, I think America would be best served forgetting about being a global superpower and just concentrating on being the best it can be for itself...the British Empire landed rather softly, they're not doing so bad. Unless you're a king, living in the empire ain't so different anyway, is it? How much better is the standard of living in the US than, oh, say, 30 or so other countries? Bragging right? Meh...

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-22-2008, 09:59 AM
GOOD FOR YOU, not using brain cells is something you excel at.
People who say that we need to "get away from oil" are basically
refugees from the short yellow schoolbus.
How about getting away from food while we're at it? Or air?

This just shows that your old useless azz is stuck in the past. Does your stupid azz believe that we have an infinite supply of oil in our car trunks too? Has your dumb azz ever heard of fuel cells, hybrid technology, electric power, solar power, and wind power?


We dont live in the "space age," computer age", or "atomic age", we
live in the HYDROCARBON AGE.
EVERYTHING in our modern lives is shaped, madew, powered, or delivered by oil.
TO say that we need to "get away from oil" is like saying bronze age man needed to "get away from bronze".

Perhaps you have been so busy running your mouth(and saying nothing) that you have not being paying attention to what is happening around you. T Boone Pickens has said we need to get away from oil, because we are shifting a great deal of our wealth to countries that are not friendly to us. What will you dumb azz do when we run out of oil? You need to stop being a today thinker, and start thinking about what is going to happen in the future. This is part of the problem, and certainly not a solution. Its time to RESHAPE our future, not stay stuck in the past.


We have enough hydrocarbon to last until we can get to the gas giants, which are basically made from the stuff.
THE MODERN WORLD is a product of oil, AND ITS GOING TO STAY that way.
To say otherwise is to engage in typical SoCal, greenie, east coast
type liberalism, coming from people who have never worked for a living,
the same people who shipped our infrastructure overseas, thinking we could run a modern economy on Britney spears CD's, TERMINATOR MOVIES, and taking out second mortages on our houses.

Unfortunately dino dude, you are part of the problem. We got the first hint that someone else was controlling our energy destiny in the 70's. Unfortunately the world is stuck with idiots like you who do not seem to learn from the past. We do not have enough oil for self sufficiency. The people who do have the oil are not our friends, and quite frankly are our enemies. In the name of national security, you do not intrust your energy policy to your enemies unless you are dumb as dirt(like those folks in Pixieville)


The power went off in my house for ten hours the other day, never got an explanation as to why, but trust me, it was grim.

The power went off on that one brain cell you have left before you wrote this. Though nothing to be grim about, for you, its business as usual.


Peeps like sir talky kill me, they have no friggin clue as to the thousands of people who are responsible for their lights coming on everytime they flip a switch, they think they're gonna run a high powered economy on corn starch and "WINDMILLS"

One billionare agrees with me as well, so I am not so concerned that audioreviews village idiot does not. We have a windmill farm here in the Bay Area that has been producing power for years. And by the way, you don't know people like me. We do not dwell in the depths of stupidity like you do, we are more forward thinkers, unlike you.


HYDROCARBON IS A fundamental technology, andif it ever goes away, so will about six billion people, because this planet can support about a billion without it, and that is mud huts, grass skirts, and wooden spears.
Of course with sir talkys obsolete HT he probably wont notice:1:

Hydrocarbon is a dirty technology that is damaging to the earth itself. If you think we can go with this "technology" forever without damaging the planet, then I have a prime piece of land in the bay I could sell you for a dollar(but I know you couldn't afford it anyway). We have the know how to go beyond this dirty, out moded, and inefficient technology with other forms of technology. You are stuck in the past, because you do not have the brain capacity to think towards the future. Its a good thing we don't have your ilk as our leaders, or we might as well just give the middle east our national treasure now, and walk away a third world country choking to death on our on air.

What a shame stuckpixel, my obsolete hometheater outperforms your newer cheapazz one two times over. I think your poor azz is just jealous that you couldn't afford my hometheater even after they raised the minimum wage for ya.

Woochifer
08-22-2008, 12:11 PM
What the hell happened here?! :shocked:

I go up to the Northwest for a week, and suddenly we're gettin' all heavy and political here. You'd think we were talking about HD-DVD vs Blu-ray or somethin'! :cool:

billyb25
08-22-2008, 01:33 PM
It's worth buying the PS3 for BR just for the fact that the firmware is updated fairly often.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-22-2008, 06:44 PM
It's worth buying the PS3 for BR just for the fact that the firmware is updated fairly often.

I couple of things make it better than any current standalone right now. First, It is easily competitive with the standalones for PQ, and it can decode all of the current and legacy audio codecs. The second point is its the one of the best upscaling DVD players, and is at least compareable to the Samsung 1200 realta chip, and totally better than any other bluray player in the upscaling department. It also is the fastest loading bluray player, and the most stable as well. BD+ and BD-java is no problem on this player, and that cannot be said for the other players currently in the market.

The Panasonic BD-50 may change all of that, but the PS3 still upscales DVD better than even this player.

Rich-n-Texas
09-26-2008, 08:26 PM
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=63068239

This is the jobber I got - these things are rare in stores, and there were only 2 1080p capable projectors I could demo with any frequency. An Optoma and Epson. For all intents and purposes I found them roughly equal in performance - that is neither had anything extra-special the other didn't have and both delivered great pictures...A few months back when I started looking around the Optoma was a bit cheaper, but things changed in July when I started really shopping - I got a better discount, warranty, free bulb and $300 mail-in rebate with the Epson so my frugal nature took over.

Now...looks like Aug 14 or so for a move-in date, so it's gonna be late August at best before I can play with it :(
House is coming along though...

Have we trashed this house yet? :aureola: