Rising Tide Lifts All Boats

My friend had me listen to an old thing on Jerry Springer this morning and it got me thinking about how much or little people give back to society. One thing I didn't know about Springer was that in the early 70s, when he was a newly elected Cincinnati City Council member, he blocked Riverfront Stadium from being built with public funding.

Granted, back then it was definitely a different political and economic landscape. Owners of professional sports teams did not have their cities at gunpoint like they do these days. And I have a feeling the people probably had a different notion of what was more important, and were maybe more in tuned to the repercussions of handing over a gigantic chunk of their city operating budget to something that didn't directly impact the lives of their citizens. I mean, it sounds like Springer forestalled by about three decades what is causing so many problems in Cincy today (the Bengals Stadium deal).

Social Responsibility is a broad ass term. If I had to make it less of a generality, what, if anything, do you owe back to the community? Some see it as the most important investment towards the future. Some see it as bullshit, and to each their own. But I think most fall somewhere in the middle of the two.

There aren't many Gandhi's out there, giving all they have back the generations that come during and after them. And when you think about it, who really wants to be the next Gandhi? You're always hungry, you get your ass kicked by police all day long, and then eventually once the tide seems to be turning in your favor some asshole shoots you in the belly (this Gandhi history lesson was brought to you by my fading memory of the movie, which I saw a long time ago). But there are some people who give back way more than their fair share. It would be tough for myself to jump overboard for a certain cause or idea when their is no certainty that you're going to succeed or make any difference.

I though am cynical of what good can be done anymore, outside of marginal things that don't move the needle in the grand scheme. And I think that is where the idea of "You do you and I'll do me" came from that a lot of people carry around. You know, if nothing can be helped in this society, then why not just get what you can for yourself and then try to make the best out of it, other people be damned. My only problem with this line of thinking is that it doesn't account for those marginal good things you can do. Why not give a little?

The middle ground is constantly shifting, but it'll never disappear. There is no reason people can't be nice to other people in little or big ways. It isn't going to break you to give a dollar or a smoke to a homeless guy now and then. And raising taxes might affect your personal bottom line in the short run, but it will help a lot of other people in the long run. And at a certain point with taxes, the people that complain the most about them getting raised probably wouldn't even know the difference in their wealth if their accountant didn't point it out to them at the end of the year. I don't know where I heard the phrase but, "The money in your account is going to go up and down forever, but life is always going to keep moving forward. So there is no point worrying over it."

I don't see any reason to ever look at greed as a good thing. Not just money-wise, in all aspects of life.