Machinehead
Would that it were true. I'm afraid I'm just another garrulous geezer who sometimes manages to get the words in the right order. But thanks anyway. I loved the kind words.
I was born in the early Depression in an industrial city. Everyone who was important to me as a child was a union member and, more importantly, a union believer. So, if the Jesuits are right and our beliefs are shaped by age 7, mine were stamped "Union Made". But beyond that, ever since high school I've been fascinated by the apparent incompatibility of America's economic and political systems. The economic system says that an individual can amass as large a fortune as he is able, and the political system says that the rest of us can get together and vote to take it away from him. That's tongue-in-cheek, of course, but the tension between the two systems is genuine, and unions, real unions, provide the best vehicle for keeping capitalism in balance. For a variety of reasons the US has opted to use government regulation as a countervailing force, and the growing gap between rich and poor is painful evidence of the result. This is a thoroughly superficial and inadequate answer to your question, but if I go into detail, this would become a tome.
At the moment I'm working here in Louisville with a group called Jobs with Justice. If you haven't heard of them, you can get more information at
www.jwj.org. The immediate aim is to get the city government to pass an ordinance guaranteeing a living wage to city employees and workers at any company that does business with the city. It's increasingly obvious that merely having a job doesn't eliminate poverty. Almost half the people living in Louisville's homeless shelters have regular jobs. We're working with local unions, especially the building trades (including UBC), and at the moment the prospects look fairly good. JWJ has been successful in several cities, and we're hoping to add Louisville to the list.
I have the luxury of being retired and healthy. So I travel a lot, often spontaneously, and consequently drop out of sight from time to time. Not petulance, just itchy feet.
But I really don't want to get involved in any more online debates. They are too frustrating. They seem to follow the same pattern. Someone suggests that cigarettes should be regulated because they pose a health risk. Someone else concurs and supplies a list of statistics and sources that document the risk. A smoker replies with some sound arguments on personal freedom and Constitutional rights. And a genuine debate seems in the making. Then someone jumps in and says that his uncle Harry smoked 4 packs a day from age 12 and lived to be 97. Another brings in her aunt Harriet's case. Then someone offers a film title or song lyric as an example of profound philosophy, and before long we're at the level of a grade school playground squabble, complete with name calling. It's no fun. I enjoy being proved wrong. It means I've learned something. If I'm right, I end up exactly where I started. But too many people in these discussions (or whatever they are) have their fragile egos on the line, and I'd just as soon not participate.
Author
Topic: radio volume question (Read 849 times)