Huge contracts show skewed priorities
This letter is in response to the articles covering Mike Trout’s $430 million contract with Los Angeles Angels.
One of the most disturbing facts about our capitalist nation is the misappropriation of funds directed to the salaries of entertainers.
Everyone should agree that the value an athlete, movie star, talk-show host, team-owner, etc. brings to the average citizen is very small.
Granted, they do offer a minuscule of diversion from our daily trials and tribulations as did the jesters in the king’s court during the middle ages.
But to allow these entertainers to horde such great amounts of wealth at the expense of more benevolent societal programs is unacceptable.
They do not provide a product or a service so why are they rewarded as such?
Our society is also subjected to the “profound wisdom” of these people because it equates wealth with influence. Perhaps a solution to this problem and an alternative to defeated school levies, crumbling infrastructures, as well as all the programs established to help feed, clothe and shelter those who cannot help themselves would be to tax this undeserved wealth.
Entertainers could keep 1 percent of the gross earnings reaped from their endeavor and 99 percent could be deposited into the public coffers.
The old ideas of the redistribution of wealth have failed, and it is time to adapt to modern-day preferences.
People put their money into entertainment above everything else; isn’t it time to tap that wealth? Does anyone think this will reduce the quality of entertainment?
It seems to me that when entertainers received less income, the quality was much higher.
Universities are being used
I understand college football players being able to move around, but universities are being used as a stepping stone to pro sports.
It seems wrong to me when these athletes receive strong scholarships and don’t complete their education.
Universities are for education, or so I thought, and not a launching pad for pro sports.