[greymule]

If somebody wants to pay six million a year for a guy who bats .245, more power to him.

Absolutely right. People who complain about the money ballplayers make act as if someone is putting a gun to the owners' heads. Apparently these people prefer that the ultra-rich owners keep more of their money.

If I want to pay somebody $200 to mow my half-acre lawn, that's up to me. If someone wants to mow my lawn for $5, that's up to him.

I've heard people argue that the government should dictate what jobs pay. (I live in a university town.) All pay--of truck drivers, secretaries, painters, probably umpires, too--should be determined by "experts" (like them) at universities. "Comparable worth" is their euphemism for this kind of Stalinism. The free market, you see, results in inequity.

One guy even claims that everyone should make the same. "Garbage collectors need the money just as much as surgeons," says this Ivy Leaguer. And to make up for the fact that some people inherit money and others don't, no one should be allowed to inherit money. Instead, in the new Utopia, everyone will get $80,000 from the government at age 21 or so, to get started in adulthood. Yes, I'm serious.

In New Jersey, public schools must pay baseball umpires and softball umpires the same. Gender equity. So an ump has a choice: $74 for an 80-minute softball game where arguments are rare and the fans are polite, or $74 for a 160-minute baseball game where. . . . Well, guess which sport is overflowing with officials and which sport needs them.

[Edited by greymule on Oct 14th, 2005 at 11:46 AM]