-> DN> time I'd reached my stop, we had 6 or 7 people in the bus invol
-> DN> in the conversation.
->
->Just about anything that they said was merely lip synchs of what
->the media had  been saying prior to that.
I really don't think so.. some of the guys were talking about how "I make
blah-de-blah-de-blah, and then Joe Blow on the Whosiwhatstis complains he
needs an extra million".  Sportswriters don't generally get into what the
salaries of the average man are, and how they compare to that of pro
players.  (For the reason that the arguement is flawed.  Like I said before,
no-one pays to see a plummer work).  However, just because their argument is
flawed, doesn't mean it's not their own.. and based on more than what
sportswriters have written.
-> DN> Then explain player strikes.
->
->Players strikes are just like any strike.
Perhaps once.. but I refer specifically to today's strikes.  Is it not true
that players enjoy a certain amount of luxury, and more than reasonable
salaries, in today's pro sports world?.. if so, why are strikes, from the
players standpoint, necessary?..
My memory fails me.. what have been some of the major hangups in recent
strikes?..  then we can get to the bottom of whether or not they were worth
losing World Series' and other games over.
->If it weren't for strikes and work stoppages, the players wouldn't
->have never  gotten free agency or higher salaries and while
->management would have been  keeping twice as much as they do, the
->players would have still be seen as  greedy
Besides the fact that there's an ugly double-negative in that first part of
the para, :), I should say that I have no problem with strikes of the past..
they're certainly served the players well!  Do you see today's player
strikes to be just as relevant and necessary?
-*- TurboEDIT v1.60a+ [MSP96]
--- Ezycom V1.48g0 01fa0167
---------------