The N.F.L. fell briefly from its Olympian heights in the recent debacle of the substitute referees, culminating in an erroneous decision that cost one team, the Green Bay Packers, a win. Roger Goodell can, with a straight face, declare in a press conference after the strike was resolved that the two sides were really already close to an agreement, anyway, and the public outcry really didn't affect the decision. Sure, Roger, and the cow will jump over the moon tomorrow! The N.F.L. and the fatcat owners know that they have the most desirable sports asset in America and recognize that, no matter what, America wants its pro football. Yet the hue and cry after the Seattle-Green Bay game did get their attention and made them blink. Roger even apologized!
It is apparent that parity in the N.F.L. is underway with a lot of the perennial premier teams like New England, Green Bay (thanks to the blown call), New Orleans and Pittsburgh struggling early. One constant, unfortunately, is my hapless Cleveland Browns losing, though they are getting closer! It is fun seeing Arizona, Houston and Atlanta riding high, making the mix more interesting.
As for the college game, it looks like Southern Cal is not going to have a cake walk, nor Oregon, for that matter. Alabama does stand out as top of the class, and the S.E.C. as the prime conference (so what else is new?). I think Ohio State, though I root for them (but had serious misgvings after the Tresell affair), is overrated, and I think Michigan State should give them a good dose of reality this weekend. Florida State looks good but, as they get deeper in the season, will they come through unscathed? I doubt it. Notre Dame looks like it's for real and back as a power. L.S.U. has their usual depth but not up to the Crimson Tide of Alabama.
But, in between all this football, there's the Ryder Cup. Go U.S.A.!
Friday, September 28, 2012
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
LIFE IN A COCOON
As I frequently do, I read David Brooks column yesterday in the Times. I don’t always agree with him, but most of the time I do, and I always enjoy his perception and wit.
He wrote a column entitled “Thurston Howell Romney”---and the title almost says it all. For those of you too young to remember the hilarious TV show “Gilligan’s Island” about a zany group marooned on a desert island, Thurston Howell III was a multi-millionaire in a world of his own anywhere in the world including a deserted island.
Recent utterings from the Republican candidate for the presidency were the inspiration for Brook’s title. Now Brooks is no wild-eyed liberal by any means: he is Republican by nature and inclination with a tendency to thoughtful moderation and a keen sense of reality. But Romney’s recent rantings even got to him. Until recently, his Republican sympathies were inclining him toward Romney, but these latest gaffes shocked him.
Even Brooks is beginning to believe that Romney lives in an isolated castle on a lofty mountain top, surrounded by his kind, the multi-rich who live an oblivious life to reality. He, plain and simple, just doesn’t get it: that a whole lot of people in this country depend to some degree or other on government entitlements---and that does not make them dead beats. Sure, we have our share of dead beats trying to beat the system, but the vast majority of those entitled need help in some form or another.
I was fortunate enough to be raised in a family of means who could afford to send me to an excellent prep school in the east and to college there. In my time at those schools I rubbed shoulders with any number of Romneys or Thurston Howells. Scott Fitzgerald exclaimed, “The very rich are very different from you and me”. He rubbed shoulders with a lot of them at Princeton and recognized the species, as reflected in his writings. The very rich are so insulated in a cocoon of money that they don’t recognize the problems of the outside world and simply don’t have to deal with little mundane problems like paying a mortgage or allotting a budget for groceries. They hire people to handle those little daily transactions while they flit from one home to several others or on cruises to exotic (or at least rich) ports. Summer holidays in Cannes or the Algarve of Portugal, Barbados in the winter, skiing holidays at St. Moritz---you name it, they’ve done it.
Don’t begrudge them their wealth. Some ancestor, or, in some cases, some recent enterprising familial dynamo has built an empire. That’s great, God bless ‘em, that’s the ultimate crowning of the American Dream. But keep one foot in the real world and remember that a lot of working people helped you realize that dream.
Brooks also added this line: “Personally, I think he’s a kind decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he’s not…” I would agree with that: Mitt Romney is essentially a good man and in reality, I suspect, a centrist. He has sold his soul to the far right to gain acceptance. The Bible, to paraphrase, says words to the effect that selling your own soul to gain the world gains you naught.
I think Mitt is going to pay that price.
He wrote a column entitled “Thurston Howell Romney”---and the title almost says it all. For those of you too young to remember the hilarious TV show “Gilligan’s Island” about a zany group marooned on a desert island, Thurston Howell III was a multi-millionaire in a world of his own anywhere in the world including a deserted island.
Recent utterings from the Republican candidate for the presidency were the inspiration for Brook’s title. Now Brooks is no wild-eyed liberal by any means: he is Republican by nature and inclination with a tendency to thoughtful moderation and a keen sense of reality. But Romney’s recent rantings even got to him. Until recently, his Republican sympathies were inclining him toward Romney, but these latest gaffes shocked him.
Even Brooks is beginning to believe that Romney lives in an isolated castle on a lofty mountain top, surrounded by his kind, the multi-rich who live an oblivious life to reality. He, plain and simple, just doesn’t get it: that a whole lot of people in this country depend to some degree or other on government entitlements---and that does not make them dead beats. Sure, we have our share of dead beats trying to beat the system, but the vast majority of those entitled need help in some form or another.
I was fortunate enough to be raised in a family of means who could afford to send me to an excellent prep school in the east and to college there. In my time at those schools I rubbed shoulders with any number of Romneys or Thurston Howells. Scott Fitzgerald exclaimed, “The very rich are very different from you and me”. He rubbed shoulders with a lot of them at Princeton and recognized the species, as reflected in his writings. The very rich are so insulated in a cocoon of money that they don’t recognize the problems of the outside world and simply don’t have to deal with little mundane problems like paying a mortgage or allotting a budget for groceries. They hire people to handle those little daily transactions while they flit from one home to several others or on cruises to exotic (or at least rich) ports. Summer holidays in Cannes or the Algarve of Portugal, Barbados in the winter, skiing holidays at St. Moritz---you name it, they’ve done it.
Don’t begrudge them their wealth. Some ancestor, or, in some cases, some recent enterprising familial dynamo has built an empire. That’s great, God bless ‘em, that’s the ultimate crowning of the American Dream. But keep one foot in the real world and remember that a lot of working people helped you realize that dream.
Brooks also added this line: “Personally, I think he’s a kind decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he’s not…” I would agree with that: Mitt Romney is essentially a good man and in reality, I suspect, a centrist. He has sold his soul to the far right to gain acceptance. The Bible, to paraphrase, says words to the effect that selling your own soul to gain the world gains you naught.
I think Mitt is going to pay that price.
Monday, September 17, 2012
ANOTHER PANDORA'S BOX
Watching and reading about the “Arab Fall” and the inflammatory effects of that stupid anti-Islam film produced by that right-wing zealot leads to thoughts about the internet. It is a boon, having created a total revolution in communication as new technology opens up more avenues of communication in the form of smart phones, tablets, texting and the like---but it is also a bane. It is Pandora’s box which has been irretrievably opened, never to be closed again. It has truly made the world, in Marshall MacLuan’s famous phrase, “a global village”. And right now we are seeing the bad effects of this communicative revolution which has made instant communication instant hell.
We can laugh it off or scoff at the detriti, flotsam and jetsam, frequently on the social networks where “friends” share the minutiae of their lives. On one hand, we know good aspects of social networking are out there: staying in touch with or reigniting friendships, sharing good news (and bad), creating photo albums of possible interest---I’m not such a curmudgeon, even though I'm not on a social network, that I can’t appreciate those aspects of social networking---but, let’s face it, on the other hand, you frequently forsake your precious privacy, and that is sad. What make it worse are the sharks out there, the hackers and intruders, trying to invade your private life and steal your money, even take over your identity. That is the ultimate privacy rape, and, unfortunately, too many of us have felt its effect.
It’s bad enough dealing with the current news: the virulent hatred of America (based on envy, of course) in the Middle East, the political polarization of America, the teachers’ strike in Chicago, the Afghanistan agony---take your pick. About the only good news I see is my beloved Cincinnati Reds in front by eleven games!
Waiter, another double Scotch---and leave out the soda this time.
We can laugh it off or scoff at the detriti, flotsam and jetsam, frequently on the social networks where “friends” share the minutiae of their lives. On one hand, we know good aspects of social networking are out there: staying in touch with or reigniting friendships, sharing good news (and bad), creating photo albums of possible interest---I’m not such a curmudgeon, even though I'm not on a social network, that I can’t appreciate those aspects of social networking---but, let’s face it, on the other hand, you frequently forsake your precious privacy, and that is sad. What make it worse are the sharks out there, the hackers and intruders, trying to invade your private life and steal your money, even take over your identity. That is the ultimate privacy rape, and, unfortunately, too many of us have felt its effect.
It’s bad enough dealing with the current news: the virulent hatred of America (based on envy, of course) in the Middle East, the political polarization of America, the teachers’ strike in Chicago, the Afghanistan agony---take your pick. About the only good news I see is my beloved Cincinnati Reds in front by eleven games!
Waiter, another double Scotch---and leave out the soda this time.
Friday, September 14, 2012
A TIME TO REFLECT
The last few days, starting with 9/11 and culminating with Neil Armstrong's official funeral yesterday, have been times for reflection. We have also been forcibly reminded of the virulent hatred among rabid Islamics for anything American with the tragic death of Ambassador Chris Stevens in Libya and the anti-Islamic film made in the U.S.A and spreading its germs throughout the Middle East.
What a tragic loss it is of a seasoned diplomat, fluent in Arabic and Arabic knowledge, one that we need to reach out and negotiate. What ripple effects are generated by a neo-Con neo-Christian promulgating his ignorance and igniting religious fires with his inflammatory film. I can't say I would be too pleased if some Muslim made a film portraying Jesus Christ as a murderous homosexual and pedophile.
Neil Armstrong's funeral triggered some wonderful memories for me. You may remember that his famous flight occurred in July of 1969. In September of that year, a Grand Parade and Appreciation day was held in late August in his hometown of Wapakoneta, Ohio, a town about thirty miles north of where I was born and raised. In fact, I remember "Wapak", as it is intimately known to us old Buckeyes, as the only place where I ever won a medal in my age bracket in a 10k run--- third place. ( I think all the really good runners were off at another race somewhere else in Ohio.)
Back to the Neil Armstrong Day, a good friend of my wife and me organized a small group from our small town to put together a picnic and head uo to Wapak for the big show. It was wonderful---the best of Americana, a small town of maybe 10,000 swelled to 50,000 celebrating a once-in-a-lifetime genuine hero who had come home. In addition to the parade they had opened up the local fairgrounds where families could continue their celebrations. As you climbed in the stands erected for the parade, you were handed a small American flag which we all waved frantically as he rode by in an open convertible and acknowledged our adulation with a wave back.
That quiet, modest and intelligent man personifies all that we love, or should love, in America. He didn't talk much; he just did it.
It's a time in the world where all of us need to talk quietly but constructively about our differences and our problems.
What a tragic loss it is of a seasoned diplomat, fluent in Arabic and Arabic knowledge, one that we need to reach out and negotiate. What ripple effects are generated by a neo-Con neo-Christian promulgating his ignorance and igniting religious fires with his inflammatory film. I can't say I would be too pleased if some Muslim made a film portraying Jesus Christ as a murderous homosexual and pedophile.
Neil Armstrong's funeral triggered some wonderful memories for me. You may remember that his famous flight occurred in July of 1969. In September of that year, a Grand Parade and Appreciation day was held in late August in his hometown of Wapakoneta, Ohio, a town about thirty miles north of where I was born and raised. In fact, I remember "Wapak", as it is intimately known to us old Buckeyes, as the only place where I ever won a medal in my age bracket in a 10k run--- third place. ( I think all the really good runners were off at another race somewhere else in Ohio.)
Back to the Neil Armstrong Day, a good friend of my wife and me organized a small group from our small town to put together a picnic and head uo to Wapak for the big show. It was wonderful---the best of Americana, a small town of maybe 10,000 swelled to 50,000 celebrating a once-in-a-lifetime genuine hero who had come home. In addition to the parade they had opened up the local fairgrounds where families could continue their celebrations. As you climbed in the stands erected for the parade, you were handed a small American flag which we all waved frantically as he rode by in an open convertible and acknowledged our adulation with a wave back.
That quiet, modest and intelligent man personifies all that we love, or should love, in America. He didn't talk much; he just did it.
It's a time in the world where all of us need to talk quietly but constructively about our differences and our problems.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
2 4s=1
My wife and I, avid ex-tennisplayers and buffs, have been mesmerized by the U.S. Open which ended yesterday, a day late due to weird weather. And what an Open it was with tension-filled finals for both the men and women.
First, the ladies. Serena Williams, ranked fourth because she does not play the full complement of tournaments, met Victoria Azarenka, ranked numero uno, a 23 year-old from Belarus who lives in Scottsdale AZ. Azarenka has really come on in the last year, winning the first major of the year, the Australian Open, and performing especially well on hard courts where her record was 34-1 and 12-0 in three sets matches. Serena has had an unbelievable second half of the year. The first half ended dismally when she was knocked out in the first round of the second major, the French Open. Serena has suffered a series of debilitating injuries the last couple years and, in fact, missed ten months of play last year, and it took awhile for her to round into shape---but did she ever. All she has done, prior to the U.S. Open final, the last part of the year is win Wimbledon, the third major (which many consider the pearl of the set of four Opens), two gold medals in singles and doubles (with sister Venus) in the London Olympics.
When Serena met Victoria in the finals of the U.S. Open, Serena started like she was going to a fire sale, gobbling everything in sight to win the first set 6-2 in less than half an hour. But then Victoria sucked it up, became acclimated to Serena's power and shortened her strokes accordingly, as well as putting more heat on her serve, and turned the tables and won the second set 6-2. It must be noted that Serena helped her along by suddenly turning erratic and spraying her shots everywhere but the court. Victoria started the third and final set with a break and suddenly was up 5-3 and at 30-30 on her own serve.
Then Serena Williams, like the Phoenix rising from the ashes, became her inimitable indominable self and refused to lose. She broke Victoria and ran off four straight games to win 7-5 and claim the title. It was a breathtaking finale.
Then it got even better when the men's final played out on Monday between the defending champion and number two in the world, Novak Djokovich, and the number four, the perennial bridesmaid and hope of Great Britain, Andy Murray of Scotland. Murray was often near the top in various Open battles of the last few years but never could win the big one. Then, this summer he beat world number one, Roger Federer, to win the gold medal in the Olympics.
The Brits have not had an Open Champion in any of the four grand slams since 1936 when Fred Perry won the U.S. Open and Wimbledon. 76 years of frustration, count 'em. That sets the scene for Djokovich and Murray.
It lasted four hours and 56 minutes and had the crowd screaming as the match yo-yoed from one to the other. Rallies of 20 strokes, 30 strokes---even one of 55 strokes--- two warriors laying their hearts and their guts on the court. Murray won an epic tiebreaker the first set, 7-6, 12 points to 10, a new U.S. Open record.. Then he won the second set 7-5.
Then the "Joker", as he is called. came roaring back and won the next two sets 6-2 and 6-4. He seemed to have all the momentum on his side.
Perhaps the effort of coming from behind by two sets took too much out of him, but Andy Murray buried the Ghosts of Matches Past and dominated the final set, also with more heart-stopping ralles, and won the final fifth set, 6-2. Britain had its champion---and I'm sure every pub in Scotland was open all night.
So, two number fours, to my mind, have earned the right to be number one as players of the year. Serena won two majors, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, plus two Olympic golds. The men's was not quite so clearcut: the four majors were won by four different men. but Murray won one of them, plus the Olympic gold to qualify as player of the year.
That's my New Math: 2 4s=1.
First, the ladies. Serena Williams, ranked fourth because she does not play the full complement of tournaments, met Victoria Azarenka, ranked numero uno, a 23 year-old from Belarus who lives in Scottsdale AZ. Azarenka has really come on in the last year, winning the first major of the year, the Australian Open, and performing especially well on hard courts where her record was 34-1 and 12-0 in three sets matches. Serena has had an unbelievable second half of the year. The first half ended dismally when she was knocked out in the first round of the second major, the French Open. Serena has suffered a series of debilitating injuries the last couple years and, in fact, missed ten months of play last year, and it took awhile for her to round into shape---but did she ever. All she has done, prior to the U.S. Open final, the last part of the year is win Wimbledon, the third major (which many consider the pearl of the set of four Opens), two gold medals in singles and doubles (with sister Venus) in the London Olympics.
When Serena met Victoria in the finals of the U.S. Open, Serena started like she was going to a fire sale, gobbling everything in sight to win the first set 6-2 in less than half an hour. But then Victoria sucked it up, became acclimated to Serena's power and shortened her strokes accordingly, as well as putting more heat on her serve, and turned the tables and won the second set 6-2. It must be noted that Serena helped her along by suddenly turning erratic and spraying her shots everywhere but the court. Victoria started the third and final set with a break and suddenly was up 5-3 and at 30-30 on her own serve.
Then Serena Williams, like the Phoenix rising from the ashes, became her inimitable indominable self and refused to lose. She broke Victoria and ran off four straight games to win 7-5 and claim the title. It was a breathtaking finale.
Then it got even better when the men's final played out on Monday between the defending champion and number two in the world, Novak Djokovich, and the number four, the perennial bridesmaid and hope of Great Britain, Andy Murray of Scotland. Murray was often near the top in various Open battles of the last few years but never could win the big one. Then, this summer he beat world number one, Roger Federer, to win the gold medal in the Olympics.
The Brits have not had an Open Champion in any of the four grand slams since 1936 when Fred Perry won the U.S. Open and Wimbledon. 76 years of frustration, count 'em. That sets the scene for Djokovich and Murray.
It lasted four hours and 56 minutes and had the crowd screaming as the match yo-yoed from one to the other. Rallies of 20 strokes, 30 strokes---even one of 55 strokes--- two warriors laying their hearts and their guts on the court. Murray won an epic tiebreaker the first set, 7-6, 12 points to 10, a new U.S. Open record.. Then he won the second set 7-5.
Then the "Joker", as he is called. came roaring back and won the next two sets 6-2 and 6-4. He seemed to have all the momentum on his side.
Perhaps the effort of coming from behind by two sets took too much out of him, but Andy Murray buried the Ghosts of Matches Past and dominated the final set, also with more heart-stopping ralles, and won the final fifth set, 6-2. Britain had its champion---and I'm sure every pub in Scotland was open all night.
So, two number fours, to my mind, have earned the right to be number one as players of the year. Serena won two majors, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, plus two Olympic golds. The men's was not quite so clearcut: the four majors were won by four different men. but Murray won one of them, plus the Olympic gold to qualify as player of the year.
That's my New Math: 2 4s=1.
Friday, September 7, 2012
THE STAGE IS SET
The tumult and the shouting of politcal conventions are about over, and not a moment too soon as far as I'm concerned because I think they are a colossal waste of money, as is the whole political process which is inordinately expensive in dollars and time, but perhaps some good came out of all this posturing.
The President made his mea culpa speech, acknowledging that he made mistakes but also an effective appeal for four more years. But the coup of the Democratic convention was Bill Clinton, the master politician who probably did more good for Obama than anything else in the whole campaign.
It was quintessental William Jefferson Clinton---colorful, masterful and over the top, like the man himself. He is larger than life in his virtues and his vices. His speech was too long but a masterpiece of politicking on behalf of Barack Obama. (I also think he helped set his wife up for 2016.) He totally rebuffed and refuted the Republican Reaganesque "Are-You-Better Off- Four-Years-Later" ploy.
Now the contenders step up. Let the heavyweights square off and present some solid specifics of what they plan to do so that we the people have some "flesh and blood" proposals to consider in making a choice. Or will Mitt continue to tap dance and Paul Ryan stick out his photogenic jaw and pose? Will Joe Biden keep his foot away from his mouth and will Barack show some warmth and passion?
Put on a real show. The stage is set.
The President made his mea culpa speech, acknowledging that he made mistakes but also an effective appeal for four more years. But the coup of the Democratic convention was Bill Clinton, the master politician who probably did more good for Obama than anything else in the whole campaign.
It was quintessental William Jefferson Clinton---colorful, masterful and over the top, like the man himself. He is larger than life in his virtues and his vices. His speech was too long but a masterpiece of politicking on behalf of Barack Obama. (I also think he helped set his wife up for 2016.) He totally rebuffed and refuted the Republican Reaganesque "Are-You-Better Off- Four-Years-Later" ploy.
Now the contenders step up. Let the heavyweights square off and present some solid specifics of what they plan to do so that we the people have some "flesh and blood" proposals to consider in making a choice. Or will Mitt continue to tap dance and Paul Ryan stick out his photogenic jaw and pose? Will Joe Biden keep his foot away from his mouth and will Barack show some warmth and passion?
Put on a real show. The stage is set.
Thursday, September 6, 2012
GIVEN MY DRUTHERS
Headline from Huffpost 9/6/12:
Abbie Jacobson, 8-Year-Old Maine Girl, Returns Lost $4,000 -- And Gets Justin Bieber As Reward
(Personally, I'd have preferred cash, like a 10% reward!)
Abbie Jacobson, 8-Year-Old Maine Girl, Returns Lost $4,000 -- And Gets Justin Bieber As Reward
(Personally, I'd have preferred cash, like a 10% reward!)
Monday, September 3, 2012
LABOR DAY RUMINATIONS
As the country takes a brief break on Labor Day, let's talk a bit about labor---and also management and government.
I read in the "New York Times" an op-ed piece by Hedrick Smith, now in his senior years, but always a well-respected journalist-commentator-talking head. Smith talked about the revolutionary, at the time, decision by Henry Ford in 1914 to raise wages to the astronomical figure of $5.00 a day at a time when a laborer was lucky to make three bucks daily. Henry Ford was never noted primarily as an altruist or for spending money unnecessarily; he was tight-fisted and eminently successful in his prime.
So why did Ford do this? Because he recognized that happy workers were successful and productive workers. If they had job security and a decent wage, they would, in addition to producing more, also spend more, which in turn would stimulate the economy, create business, and therefore increase prosperity for business, a felicitous cycle.
In the course of his article Smith dropped an interesting and neglected statistic; from 1973 until 2011 productivity increased over 80% while wages increased a shade over 4%, according to economic data analyzed by the Economic Policy Institute.
Smith also mentions the social contract practiced in Germany between government, business and labor where agreements are reached for the common good by each side being willing to compromise for the betterment of all.
It would be well for politicians, government employees, workers, capitalists and the financial world to heed these facts. Wages have certainly not kept pace in this modern world, and, as a result the poorer working class has grown and the middle class is stagnant. Given, businesses have modernized, streamlined, pared off the fat and are lean mean profit machines, which is good competitively. If, however, we continue to grow the poor and weaken the middle class, won't something have to give? At some point, won't resentment turn even nastier and create a kind of economic civil war? The "Occupy Wall Street" was a tangible sign of such rebellion.
Can't political parties at odds, businesses and unions at odds, financiers and regulators at odds---can't these disparate but interdependent factions learn to converse with each other FOR THE COMMON GOOD? We don't have to become a socialist state to achieve such harmony. This country has been world-famous for its creativity, innovation and economic success. Can't we take that ingenuity and apply it to the betterment of all segments of American society?
We need successful and prosperous capitalists. We need a growing and dynamic work force. We need a political system not in deadlock but able to converse and solve problems. Our time is running out to achieve such harmony. We need better educational standards; we need a symbiotic relationship between management and labor; we need a government that mutually faces up to the problems of deficit and entitlements in a problem-solving positive mode.
Just a few Labor Day thoughts. Have a good one.
I read in the "New York Times" an op-ed piece by Hedrick Smith, now in his senior years, but always a well-respected journalist-commentator-talking head. Smith talked about the revolutionary, at the time, decision by Henry Ford in 1914 to raise wages to the astronomical figure of $5.00 a day at a time when a laborer was lucky to make three bucks daily. Henry Ford was never noted primarily as an altruist or for spending money unnecessarily; he was tight-fisted and eminently successful in his prime.
So why did Ford do this? Because he recognized that happy workers were successful and productive workers. If they had job security and a decent wage, they would, in addition to producing more, also spend more, which in turn would stimulate the economy, create business, and therefore increase prosperity for business, a felicitous cycle.
In the course of his article Smith dropped an interesting and neglected statistic; from 1973 until 2011 productivity increased over 80% while wages increased a shade over 4%, according to economic data analyzed by the Economic Policy Institute.
Smith also mentions the social contract practiced in Germany between government, business and labor where agreements are reached for the common good by each side being willing to compromise for the betterment of all.
It would be well for politicians, government employees, workers, capitalists and the financial world to heed these facts. Wages have certainly not kept pace in this modern world, and, as a result the poorer working class has grown and the middle class is stagnant. Given, businesses have modernized, streamlined, pared off the fat and are lean mean profit machines, which is good competitively. If, however, we continue to grow the poor and weaken the middle class, won't something have to give? At some point, won't resentment turn even nastier and create a kind of economic civil war? The "Occupy Wall Street" was a tangible sign of such rebellion.
Can't political parties at odds, businesses and unions at odds, financiers and regulators at odds---can't these disparate but interdependent factions learn to converse with each other FOR THE COMMON GOOD? We don't have to become a socialist state to achieve such harmony. This country has been world-famous for its creativity, innovation and economic success. Can't we take that ingenuity and apply it to the betterment of all segments of American society?
We need successful and prosperous capitalists. We need a growing and dynamic work force. We need a political system not in deadlock but able to converse and solve problems. Our time is running out to achieve such harmony. We need better educational standards; we need a symbiotic relationship between management and labor; we need a government that mutually faces up to the problems of deficit and entitlements in a problem-solving positive mode.
Just a few Labor Day thoughts. Have a good one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)