CarolinaSock

At this price point and with so many parts already accounted for I'd wait a month to see how the 3000 series Ryzen match up against Intel.

I was basing this around the price of the build the OP posted which was 720$. He'd have to up his budget if he wanted a next tier of graphic card like the 1660ti or vega 56. Same with the SSD I was simply going off the size he was looking at and picking a better brand but still very much a budget pick.

I'd wait until the 3000 chips come out to buy either. Chances are the prices of the 2000 series will come down even more when the 3000 releases. Then you can decide between the 2700, 3700x, or even the 3600 and 2600 chips depending on where you want to allocate your resources. I would also think about if you want to overclock or not. I have a Ryzen5 1600 that I overclock to 3.7 ghz without even messing with the voltage but I do have an aftermarket cooler rather than the standard one. I would recommend getting RAM of at least 3000mhz as Ryzen benefits quite a bit from fast RAM. I'd take a look at the AMD rx570 and rx580 graphic cards as an alternate to the 1050ti or 1060 as well because they are very competitive performance wise and can often be found cheaper. Here's a build coming in under 700 and the motherboard is going to have ryzen 3000 compatibility with a bios update if you want to upgrade in the future. The power supply leaves you a little head room if you want to upgrade your graphics card in the future and need a little more juice to run it. https://pcpartpicker.com/list/YMG9V6

McConnell pretty much sums up here what Trump is going to say regardless of who the candidate is and we know 35% of the voting population will believe anything Trump says. If the center of politcal ideology is half way between where liberals and conservatives stand, then the center has moved right for the last 20-30 years. It's only considered "far left" because the right has moved so far they've fallen off a cliff. https://www.thecrosstab.com/2019/01/04/how-much-has-congress-polarized/ https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/04/19/donald-trumps-takeover-of-his-party-is-near-complete

Healthcare spending has actually slowed down this last decade compared to previous decades. A market based solution can't work for insurance because it's an inelastic demand product with vastly different costs depending on the individual. Competition in the insurance market doesn't matter if you're someone nobody wants to insure. There's a reason we have Medicare. Nobody would willingly insure a very large portion of the elderly. There's no profit in it. The same goes for millions of Americans with preexisting conditions they have no control over. Type 1 diabetes, cerebral palsy, down syndrome, cystic fibrosis, epilepsy, sickle cell, etc etc. Premiums for these people would either be unaffordable or not even offered. I work in medical billing and more specifically I code ICU notes. Even now I see a dozen or more type 1 diabetics come in every week with ketoacidosis because they couldn't afford their insulin. https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spending-healthcare-changed-time/#item-health-spending-growth-has-slowed-and-is-now-more-on-pace-with-economic-growth_2017

Everyone needs healthcare and while some is optional most of it has an inelastic demand. Most people over 65 would be considered uninsurable because chances are you would end up paying out more than you brought in on them. Which is why we have socialized medicine for the elderly. The only people there would be "competition" for in an insurance market would be the people that need it the least. Nobody is going to fight over insuring someone with something like heart failure or diabetes as long as profit is the #1 goal. If you want to see competition at work just look at the insurance marketplaces. Any insurance provider authorized in that state could participate and yet more and more left the marketplace because it wasn't profitable. As long as profit is the motivator in healthcare the people that need it the most are going to either have to pay the most or not be covered at all.

The director has said they will be making changes to the design of Sonic after the response to the trailer. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/05/after-trailer-outcry-sonic-the-hedgehog-director-tells-fans-to-expect-changes/

Cam needs to find throwing lanes if he's going to throw it so low, that hit a lineman's helmet.

Defense was not good, but only scoring 13 on Atlanta is just pathetic.

He can throw it 10 yards over the head of someone in the endzone or near the sidelines no problem and not get a grounding call.

We have absolutely no pass rush and haven't nearly the entire game, not to mention they've been getting pounded in the run game. Dline has been embarrassing most of the game.

Our D-line is getting blown off the ball, they look terrible.

Why did he hesitate? Olsen was wide open.

We should have already had a touchdown if Cam doesn't hot dog it.

Fivethirtyeight has us as the most likely victory this week at 86%. That's higher than New England over Buffalo and Seattle over San Francisco. Just for a reference they are 8-1 predicting our games, with only the Seattle game being an upset for us according to them.

Another bad throw.

Luke and Coleman blew that play.

That was a bad throw, you guys will defend any throw cam makes.

Another terrible throw.

Funchess did a good job even touching that ball, it was 10 yards too far to the middle of the field.

Quitting making excuses, Olsen had to slow down to almost a stop because the pass was short.

If he leads Olsen that's 6, terrible pass.

That was a terrible throw that actually put the ball within reach of the defender.

Throw low and behind where the defender was, not a good throw at all.

Would have been a great catch on a ball thrown hard, high, and a little behind.