Seen several meme's in the past week or so with regard to the recent near-tragedy of Buffalo Bills player, Damar Hamlin. The meme in question is a picture of the ambulance on the field, usually circled by an imaginary red marker, with words to the effect of... "The least paid people on the field are the people who saved Hamlin's life..." The implication, of course, being that the first responders who showed up -- in the tow of the Bills and Bengals medical staff who were actually the first to administer care to Hamlin - are severely underpaid. The football players on the field that night earn massively more money than do the emergency and medical personnel who saved Hamlin's life.
It's true, of course. And quite frankly, I'm tired of hearing about it. There is most certainly a huge chasm between the salaries of the likes of professional athletes, and those of medical and emergency personnel, and, for the purposes of this debate, teachers. And there's only one group of people to blame for that wage gap...
Us.
It's our fault. And the reality is, most people want to complain about it, but they really don't want to do anything to fix it. And, sadly, the only group of people who can change it is, again, us.
Firstly, most teachers and medical and emergency personnel are paid by the government. (I realize some EMS workers are paid by hospitals or some other private medical firms. But not all) Be it local, which is where most of the funds come from, or state and federal funds, the wages and salaries of those workers come from tax money -- yours and mine. I won't get into the weeds of exactly where that money comes from, and what taxes are specifically used to pay those salaries, but the bottom line is, they are public employees, and they are paid with our tax money.
So the simple reality is, we, the general public, through the mechanism of elections -- again, at both the local, and the state and federal levels -- choose representatives who then determine what funds are available for those salaries, and at what levels those salaries are set. Our representatives set the salaries of our public employees with our tax money. It's really not more complicated than that.
So, they make what they make based on those parameters. To increase those salaries, one of two things (or a combination of both) has to happen: Either more tax money has to be collected and allocated to said salaries, or other government funding has to be cut and THAT money has to be allocated to salaries. That's about it. There is no magical place where money comes from, and no magical formula our representatives have that can magically increase salaries.
And there's the rub. Most people don't want their taxes raised... period. How many of you have complained about how much a teacher or a policeman makes, and yet have voted against a tax referendum that would raise more revenue for a school? How many of you griped about how much a fireman or an EMS worker earns, and yet have allowed your representatives to give money away to China, or to fund a grant study on cow farts?
But here's the real doozy: Raise your hand if you'd be willing to see our government cut spending on something like cancer research or autism research if that money could be used to raise teacher's salaries? Who would be in favor of cutting disaster relief if we could use that money to pay policemen more?
THAT's the real problem. We ALL think these people deserve more money, we just don't want to do the things necessary to make it happen. We foolishly vote for the same representatives over and over again who make the same decisions and pass the same laws (even AFTER we cry and complain that we should "throw them all out!" How many of you who think we should "throw them all out" actually voted for a different candidate last election?) We vote against tax increases (and we should, by the way) and yet at the same time don't want funding cut to whatever pet cause we happen to support. Ask a person who's parent just died from cancer if they'd like the government to cut funding for cancer research to raise teacher salaries. Ask a parent with an autistic child if they'd like funding cut for autism research for the same reasons. Ask liberal abortion supporters if they'd like funding for Planned Parenthood cut to use the money to pay policemen and firemen more.
You get the point.
But here's the second issue:
There's only one group of people to blame for the exorbitant salaries made by professional athletes (and other entertainers):
Yep. Us.
We pay athletes salaries. We buy the tickets. We buy the concessions. We pay the parking fees. We buy the merchandise. We buy the products that are advertised during the games we watch on television. We pay the streaming fees to watch the games. It's our fault.
Do you think a pro sports team owner would pay a player millions of dollars per year if he didn't have the revenue to pay it? And where do you think that money comes from? And you think athletes are OVERPAID? If a McDonald's franchise owner charged $50 for a Big Mac, and people paid it willingly, do you think it would be fair to pay the employees minimum wage who make it and serve it to you?
If we, as a society, are willing to pay the prices we pay for entertainment, et al -- and we are -- thus earning the owners of those entities sometimes billions of dollars in revenue, then why shouldn't the guys who generate that revenue get a fair share of it? We don't like it because it's massive amounts of money we can't wrap our heads around, but the truth is, we all feel exactly the same way when it comes to our own salaries, even though we're talking about much smaller sums of money.
Generally, most employment sectors pay their employees fairly based on the revenue they generate. (I did say "generally"!) Labor unions demand it. And because Big Macs only cost about $5 each, the average worker at McDonalds isn't going to get a million dollar a year contract. Many of you reading this right now work a job for which you think you are fairly compensated. And if you don't, you're either complaining about it, or trying to do something about it. In any event, you're either being fairly compensated, or looking for a job where you'll be fairly compensated, whatever that means to you. If you go to McDonalds and demand a 5 year, $1.5 million contract, it probably ain't gonna happen.
Regardless, athletes make what they make because the public pays what they pay to generate the revenue from which they are paid. That money doesn't grow on trees. It comes from us. Every time a team raises their ticket prices, we pay it. Every time they raise the price for a jersey, we pay it. And if we'd stop paying it, they would eventually have to adjust salaries back down.
And before you say... "Not me! I don't give the NFL a dime of my money," or some other such nonsense, first of all, you're either lying, or lying to yourself. Every time you buy a Bud light, or a bag of Doritos, or watch a TV program on any major network, you're giving money to a major sports team. Like or not, directly or indirectly. In some cases, it's inevitable. Unless you wanna become the Unabomber and move to a cabin in the woods, money you're spending somewhere is likely helping raise revenue for a pro or college sports outfit.
But worse... we're back to the Cancer vs. Autism debate. You may not support the NFL. You may hate the NBA or Major League Baseball. You might not even ever go to the movies. But I'd bet my grandchildren you're doing something to help the entertainers of our society make a whole bunch of money. Maybe you don't go to the movies, but you watch every episode of every iteration of CSI ever put out on TV. You might hate the NFL, but you watched the NCAA football championship the other night. You might boycott the NBA, but you bought your kid those Jordans he wanted so bad for his birthday. You downloaded Taylor Swift's latest songs, which just happens to be on the same label as that rapper you hate so much.
You buy the products, watch the programs, or otherwise support whatever it is that gets your own juices flowing. And if you didn't, whatever that is wouldn't generate as much revenue as it does.
And what is so terrible anyway? Think about what we would do in our society if we didn't have these recreations to turn to. To get away from life for awhile and just enjoy something. Sports, movies, and all other forms of recreation are necessary to our society to provide us all a respite every now and then, if for no other reason than to help prevent us all from killing one another eventually. What would we do without them?
Nevertheless, I'm tired of hearing people complain about it. I really am. If you believe our public employees are heroes and deserve higher salaries, then start making the changes that will make it happen. If you think athletes are overpaid, stop spending your money on things that support the industry.
But remember this... you're a very small fish in a very big ocean. You can do your part, but good luck getting several hundred million of your friends to follow your lead. If you think NFL stadiums are going to go empty anytime soon because most of the free world suddenly decided to take a moral high road... well... good luck with that.
Similarly, if you think society is suddenly going to agree on how to force our government to spend our tax money... well... good luck with too. You can take this to the bank... you're never gonna get the cancer research guy and the Planned Parenthood guy to agree on much of anything when it comes to how government money should be spent, even IF they both agree that teachers and EMS workers should be paid more. Call me a fatalist. I prefer to think I'm a realist.
Meanwhile... either do something about it, or stop griping about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment