Re: Dorine...

[snoopy1@pig.net]

>I agreed with you that the reserves on the minimum wage should get paid
>more than they do until I really thought about it..
>
>You're saying that Greg Anderson who got $272,000 last season for 400
>minutes played (or $680 per minute) for being the last man off the bench
>deserves more than with a Karl Malone getting $5,118,578 for 3029
>minutes played (or $1689 per minute) being the so-called star of the
>team....
>
>I dont know, but I think Karl Malone is value to an owner compared to
>your typical benchie at $680 per min.

Sometimes, I wonder who is kidding whom.  I sat back for a moment and
thought about what the minimum is they're arguing about.  As quoted above,
Greg Anderson got paid "$272,000 last season for 400 minutes played (or
$680 per minute)".  This works out to $4,080 per hour.  He played (worked)
for 400 minutes--that's basically 6 1/2 hours of work (ok, 6.66 but I'm not
trying to be too picky).  Less than one day's work for the overwhelming
majority of us.

And this, in some universe, is considered insufficient?  This is not
enough?  For a guy who sits on the bench????

If I had an employee who made that kind of money for that little work
demanding a raise, I wouldn't lock him out--I'd fire his greedy butt, and
get on with the season.  I'm all in favor of people getting a fair shake,
but there's people where I live doing work for barely above minimum
wage--the REAL minimum.  They, like me, wouldn't mind in the least getting
to spend one year sitting on the bench for an staggered total of 400
minutes over 9 months and collecting nearly $300,000 for doing so.  

One might debate whether people like Bird, Jordan, et. al., are worth the
millions paid to them, but they are the top of the game.  They at least
make their presence felt on the court.   I couldn't pick Greg Anderson out
of a police lineup, never mind a basketball lineup.  It just doesn't  make
any sense to me.  I'd say they're getting a sweet deal as it is.  Really,
what's the difference between one million and two million (ok, a million)?
Any investor with reasonably functional brain cells could double or triple
that in short order, even in a volatile market.
 
Maybe I'm just grouchy, but in a month where illness put me on half pay,
and I wonder which bills will be paid, I'm none too tolerant of someone
with a six (or seven) figure income demanding more money.  Maybe they
should try making a living on a realistic income, then see how "unfair"
their current rates really are.

poof...