Two items today, both requiring some thought to truly determine the value of what’s been said and by whom.
Representative Jim Moran, Democrat from Virginia opines: “I think the American people should know that the members of Congress are underpaid…I understand that it’s widely felt that they underperform, but the fact is that this is the board of directors for the largest economic entity in the world,” according to Chris Stirewalt of Fox News.com.”
This one struck me because, apparently, according to this guy people should be compensated in accordance with the size of entity they represent rather than the quality of their performance.
Consequently, if you employ that logic to other organizations, those running the postal service should have their pay scales tripled or quadrupled, or more, because by 2015, the U.S. Postal Service is expected to be losing money at a rate of $20 billion a year. A huge amount to manage regardless that the whole operation’s a total loss.
And how about the presidency itself? Under the pay for size plan running a $3.7 trillion budget for 2014 ought to be worth several million in compensation, instead of the mere $400,000 the incumbent receives now. What’s more, having to manage $17 trillion dollars in national debt, accrued due to total financial ineptitude, should deserve another couple of million bucks in bonuses.
Because, using the Congressman's theory, poor performance doesn’t matter, meaning that the bigger the loss, the more compensation earned. And if you applied that logic to business entities, the chairman of Solyndra should be paid more than the chairman of Microsoft.
Which brings me to another “expert.”
A.W.R. Hawkins, of Breitbart via Drudge writes about a comment by sportscaster Bob Costas to Late Night host Seth Meyers, regarding gun control, as follows:
Costas said, “Let's make a bet, you and me. Let's say over the next five years we'll do a Google search. We'll have an independent party monitor it. You keep track of how many good and constructive things are associated with athletes having a gun, and I'll keep track of all the tragedies and criminality and folly. And let's see who comes out ahead or behind as the case may be.”
Reading the preceding carefully, it’s obvious that the “good and constructive things” can’t even be measured. Because, aside from the fact that no one could possibly figure out how many athletes carry protection and who doesn't, the very fact that they might be armed is a deterrent all by itself. As a result, the very possibility that an athlete’s protected, by themselves or bodyguards, prevents and dissuades countless harmful occurrences.
However in Costas’ case, his whole life is commentating and opining on subjects he has no first hand experience with whatsoever.
According to his Wikipedia profile, “Robert Quinlan "Bob" Costas (born March 22, 1952) is an American sportscaster, on the air for NBC Sports television since the early 1980s. He has been prime-time host of nine Olympic games. He also does play-by-play for MLB Network and hosts an interview show called Studio 42 with Bob Costas.”
So, here’s a guy who’s a self-proclaimed expert who has likely never played any sport well he pontificates about. Furthermore, he's never suited-up in any of them at the professional level. Or amateur either as far as I can tell. Nonetheless, he has the gall to critique those who do. Which is the major reason I keep my TV sound off. Especially so because I watch others play games the same way he does.The only difference being, I played many of the sports myself.
In summation then, today’s items basically address various aspects of performance. On one hand we have a Congressman believing those having significant responsibility should be rewarded according to the size of the challenge, rather than the quality of their performance and the results. While on the other we have a professional voyeur voicing an opinion upon a subject he can’t possibly know the first thing about.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment