DE Nick Bosa "Smaller Bear" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Originally posted by frozen49er:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by mayo49:

I need some goddamn Bosa.

he doesn't want to sign with the 49ers.

Wants to be closer to his family.

NJ.com ranked the five players most likely to make a big impact at the pro level after this year's draft. They ranked Nick Bosa number one. Their reasoning? Along with his immense talent, it's easier for edge rushers to adapt to the NFL game.
It makes sense – they don't have the pressure to lead a team the way a QB does. And while they have plenty of techniques and defensive schemes to learn, they don't have as many formations to learn as offensive lineman entering the league.
While anything can happen once he gets to the professional level, Bosa gives the 49ers a lot to be excited about. Based on his athleticism, experience, skill set, and the position he plays, it seems like San Francisco fans will see quick returns on this particular investment
https://www.sportscasting.com/nfl/nfl-why-san-francisco-49ers-fans-are-going-to-love-nick-bosa/

Originally posted by Furlow:

Right. $1 million all in year one of a five year contract. So you get hosed on the taxes. But hey just shut up and take the money because it's a lot. Why anyone ever sides with these billionaire owners/teams is baffling to me. Although there are a ton of poor people who continue to argue for trickle down economics, so I shouldn't be surprised. Lol

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Right. $1 million all in year one of a five year contract. So you get hosed on the taxes. But hey just shut up and take the money because it's a lot. Why anyone ever sides with these billionaire owners/teams is baffling to me. Although there are a ton of poor people who continue to argue for trickle down economics, so I shouldn't be surprised. Lol

Finally! Someone I agree with lmao some
How corporations have convinced the poor to shut their mouth and just take what's given to them, never fight for yourself.

Also, who the hell actually thinks that giving the corporations billions more in money, who's sole job Is to reward the share holder and pay as little as possible to everyone else, is a great economic practice? It's never been sustainable.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Right. $1 million all in year one of a five year contract. So you get hosed on the taxes. But hey just shut up and take the money because it's a lot. Why anyone ever sides with these billionaire owners/teams is baffling to me. Although there are a ton of poor people who continue to argue for trickle down economics, so I shouldn't be surprised. Lol

Finally! Someone I agree with lmao some
How corporations have convinced the poor to shut their mouth and just take what's given to them, never fight for yourself.

Also, who the hell actually thinks that giving the corporations billions more in money, who's sole job Is to reward the share holder and pay as little as possible to everyone else, is a great economic practice? It's never been sustainable.

Today's typical smartphone replaces a wide range of equipment one would have purchased back in the early 1990s -- from computers to stereo equipment to cameras to clock radios. And, oh yeah, telephones.
Now, Bret Swanson of TechPolicyDaily.com has crunched some of the pricing behind these replaced items and more, coming up with an estimate as to what it would have cost to put together a high-functioning smartphone in 1991, comparable to today's iPhone: $3.6 million, versus the $100-$300 price tag (depending on deals) incurred when purchased with one of today's mobile plans.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/an-iphone-would-have-cost-36-million-two-decades-ago/

Originally posted by Giedi:

Bosa! Bosa! Bosa! Having said that,....

Your smart phone is an example of trickle down economics. If you price your video camera, phone, computer, digital recorder, pager, maps, snail mail, GPS, etc... by past standards (around 1990) that phone would be almost $20,000.

Today's typical smartphone replaces a wide range of equipment one would have purchased back in the early 1990s -- from computers to stereo equipment to cameras to clock radios. And, oh yeah, telephones.
Now, Bret Swanson of TechPolicyDaily.com has crunched some of the pricing behind these replaced items and more, coming up with an estimate as to what it would have cost to put together a high-functioning smartphone in 1991, comparable to today's iPhone: $3.6 million, versus the $100-$300 price tag (depending on deals) incurred when purchased with one of today's mobile plans.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/an-iphone-would-have-cost-36-million-two-decades-ago/

Originally posted by tankle104:
Hmm I'm trying to figure out what you mean, are you saying trickle down economics is the cause for innovation? If so, so then there was none to very little innovation before 1980? No innovation In the 90s? Or from 2009-2016?

Interesting. If you open up a companies financials - a small portion of profits/revenue goes R&D for a majority of companies.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Bosa is going to beat Aldon's sack record!

RE: innovation. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Ellison, etc... get paid billions to innovate. It pays big time in our economy. Ford invented the assembly line. Carnegi the steel processing technology and railroad stuff, and Leland Stanford founded Stanford University. Innovation comes in all areas, political, scientific, educations and, technical, law, - you pay for innovation. If you don't - then you don't get innovation.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Bosa is going to beat Aldon's sack record!

RE: innovation. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Ellison, etc... get paid billions to innovate. It pays big time in our economy. Ford invented the assembly line. Carnegi the steel processing technology and railroad stuff, and Leland Stanford founded Stanford University. Innovation comes in all areas, political, scientific, educations and, technical, law, - you pay for innovation. If you don't - then you don't get innovation.

Lol I'm not saying people shouldn't be rich and rewarded for their work. I actually work at an investment bank. Im not for socialism or anything lol. Just not a fan of trickle down economics. You do realize that trickle down economic theory isn't the only capitalistic economic theory right?

riginally posted by genus49:
7/24-7/26 is my target for this deal getting done.

Not going to stress about this at all until Nick and Deebo are back in the Bay area and TC is starting with no news.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Bosa! Bosa! Bosa! Having said that,....

Your smart phone is an example of trickle down economics. If you price your video camera, phone, computer, digital recorder, pager, maps, snail mail, GPS, etc... by past standards (around 1990) that phone would be almost $20,000.

Today's typical smartphone replaces a wide range of equipment one would have purchased back in the early 1990s -- from computers to stereo equipment to cameras to clock radios. And, oh yeah, telephones.
Now, Bret Swanson of TechPolicyDaily.com has crunched some of the pricing behind these replaced items and more, coming up with an estimate as to what it would have cost to put together a high-functioning smartphone in 1991, comparable to today's iPhone: $3.6 million, versus the $100-$300 price tag (depending on deals) incurred when purchased with one of today's mobile plans.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/an-iphone-would-have-cost-36-million-two-decades-ago/

Originally posted by T-9ers:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Bosa! Bosa! Bosa! Having said that,....

Your smart phone is an example of trickle down economics. If you price your video camera, phone, computer, digital recorder, pager, maps, snail mail, GPS, etc... by past standards (around 1990) that phone would be almost $20,000.

Today's typical smartphone replaces a wide range of equipment one would have purchased back in the early 1990s -- from computers to stereo equipment to cameras to clock radios. And, oh yeah, telephones.
Now, Bret Swanson of TechPolicyDaily.com has crunched some of the pricing behind these replaced items and more, coming up with an estimate as to what it would have cost to put together a high-functioning smartphone in 1991, comparable to today's iPhone: $3.6 million, versus the $100-$300 price tag (depending on deals) incurred when purchased with one of today's mobile plans.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/an-iphone-would-have-cost-36-million-two-decades-ago/

Would be willing to bet most of those things come through funding paid for by our taxes via the military or university system, making them trickle up.