A Few Thoughts

With so much money invested in their players, why do Major League teams insist on playing games in such cold weather?  I think the Tigers played the last few games when it was in the low- or mid-30s, with quite a bit of wind.  At least one of the games was in swirling snow!  How easy it would be for a pitcher to hurt his arm or a batter or fielder to get a bone bruise.  I would think owners would want to be more careful with their investments.

For that matter, why do high school teams now play so many games in cold weather, too?  I know their refrain, "We have to get in the games."  But why do the coaches insist on now playing 30 or more games in the season?  The little leagues are the same way.  There's no good reason for starting so soon, when it's so cold, when the season could be started a month later and extended until mid-July.  Professional, college, high school, little league--take my word for it, playing in the cold and snow is not fun.

Maybe I'm the only one not particularly happy with the Red Wings' new arena plan being approved.  That's sacrilege, I know, but...... I guess I'll never understand why taxpayers (or rather the politicians who agree to it) should pay, at least in part, for a billionaire to build a stadium.  I know why the billionaire wants the taxpayers to do so, but not why taxpayers always seem to agree to it.  The argument goes that more jobs, more business traffic, etc. from the new stadium will generate more revenue for the city and surrounding businesses.  I think several studies have shown, after the construction is completed, there's no financial benefit.  Revenues are flat.  I suppose the argument might hold water in that some blighted areas are improved, but......  Such taxpayer-funded arenas will never disappear; Americans love their sports too much.

I read an interesting article on the value of community colleges.  Among several good points, community colleges allow students who might not be sure they want college to experiment, to try out the college academics without paying the outrages costs of four-year schools.  They can then decide if college is for them or not.  But the article also lauded President Obama's recent call for free community college.  The author fell into the same old trap:  it wouldn't really be "free."  Someone somewhere is paying for it.  As Milton Friedman once said, "There's no such thing as a free lunch."  I suppose this falls into our generational mindset that also holds, "Why should I have to work at a job I don't like just to provide [health care] for my family."  This came from H. Clinton in one of her "follow your dreams" speeches.  How typical!  Let others pay for what we want.  And we call "the 1%" greedy??????

Just throwing around a few figures, maybe I am in favor of those fast-food workers' quest for $15 an hour.  At one of the colleges, using the ObamaCare formula to determine weekly hours, I am now working (that is, teaching college history) for about $13.50 an hour.  I would like a raise, too!

I see the IRS didn't respond to more than eight million calls for assistance.  The agency, according to its director, is undermanned.  (Can I say "underpersoned" or "underpeopled?")  Its customer service has never been top flight.  Of those who did get through to the IRS, only 40% talked to a real person.  The excuse is the cost of ObamaCare, how the IRS had to divert funds to handle the mandates ObamaCare placed on it.  Gee, I wonder if we paid our taxes with the same concern and efficiency we get from the federal government......

I got a kick out of the recent U of M (and I think EMU?) reactions to showings of the film, American Sniper.  Student protests/petitions initially led to cancellation of the showings, apparently because the film depicts Islamic terrorists in a bad light.  I'm still trying to imagine how to portray them in a good light or at least a better one.  But there are other concerns, too.  First, it appears the new administration at U of M is governing by student petition.  Maybe not, but it seems so.  Second, aren't the colleges/universities supposed to be institutions where a diverse number of viewpoints are presented?  Yes, I said it, "diversity!"  Perhaps my definition or at least understanding of it is different from the colleges' defs.  And OK, students can and should protest; it's part of the educational process.  But, unless the local media didn't cover it, I never ever saw a college protest over the beheading of Christians, throwing of gays off of buildings, etc.  Maybe such protests would portray the beheaders in a bad light??????