Daniel Millhouse's Blog, page 12

Reboots Coming to a Television Near You

With the resurgence of movie reboots in the past decade, it shouldn't be a shock that television wouldn't be far behind. Television had been drifting into an endless void of reality shows and the world of the television writer was shrinking rapidly. Now, the writing industry will be making a comeback, but unfortunately not on original terms.

Popular shows such as Full House, Married With Children, and Coach will all pick up where their original runs left off. Another 90s favorite, Boys Meets World, has already picked up where it left off, but in the form of Girl Meets World with Cory and Topanga as the parents. Even The Odd Couple was remade with Matthew Perry and Thomas Lennon playing Felix and Oscar. Rumors of other hit shows such as Three's Company, Fresh Prince of Bel Air, and Green Acres have been rumored to also be in discussions for a reboot.

Has the industry really run out of good ideas? No, they still exist, but studio executives are unwillingly to give many new intellectual properties a chance. They prefer to error on the side of caution by greenlighting shows that contain characters that America has already built a love for. These reboots may answer questions such as, "Whatever happened to Coach Fox after the show ended?", but there is no reason to expand these answers beyond something more than a reunion episode or movie.

Internet streaming services have benefited from the lack of original writing on standard and cable television. The most watched Netflix shows, House of Cards and Orange is the New Black were both turned down by primetime networks.

If any good can be said to have come from the revival of old shows, it's the fact that children's favorites such as Reading Rainbow and The Muppets will be making their comebacks as well.

Television needs to drift back towards original programming. Reality shows have gone as about as far as they can go with shows such as Hollywood Cycle, Ax Men, and Big Brother scraping the bottom of the "topics" barrel. With talented writers everywhere to be found, there are hit ideas out there that are waiting to be discovered. Will there be flops? Yes, of course, but successful shows will more than make up for the flops.

*Photo Credit: Married With Children promotional photo

Is Blue a New Color?

One fascinating study that was revealed earlier this year, but gained little attention from the mainstream media, is the possibility that humans didn't have the ability to see the color blue until recently. Well, recently in comparison with how long humans have been around at least. The study combined aspects of literature and science to come up with the hypothesis.

One example the study cites is Homer's Odyssey. While Homer uses black and white as descriptions of colors in his work quite a lot and then red and green less so, he never once uses the color blue. Instead of describing the sea as being blue in color, Homer describes the sea as a 'wine-dark sea'. In other ancient Greek works, the sky is often described as yellow or red in color.

According to a philologist named Lazarus Geiger, even ancient China, Iceland, Hindu, Arabic, and Hebrew texts make no mention of the color. Egyptians were the first of the ancient cultures to use the word and that could possibly be because they were theorized to be the first culture to be able to produce blue dyes.

Presently, it was discovered that not all humans could detect the color blue. A tribe of people called Himba, located in Namibia, a country located in the southwest portion of the African continent was part of this study. The Himba tribe didn't have a word for the color blue and when their eye sight was tested, couldn't tell the color green apart from the color blue. Scientists showed tribal members eleven green squares and one blue square, but couldn't pick out the blue square.

Could it be possible that our ancestors really couldn't see blue? If so, it can be speculated that humans in the last few thousand years have undergone evolution when it comes to colors that humans can see. If this is true, are there any other colors humans will be able to see thousands of years from now that we as a species can't see today?

2015 Millhouse MLB Midseason Awards

2015 Millhouse MLB Midseason Awards

American League:
MVP: Mike Trout- It's hard to deny how good he is. He hits for power, he steals bases, he's a strong defender, and he won back-to-back MVP awards for the All-Star game.

Cy Young: Dallas Keuchel- He's finally developed into the pitcher the Astros thought he could be. He is the AL leader in ERA, one of the leaders in wins, and has led the Astros into a surprising first half performance that has impressed the rest of the MLB.

Rookie of the Year: Billy Burns- (although if Carlos Correa keeps producing at the rate he has, I believe he'll take it for the year). Burns doesn't have the power, but he can steal, he hits over .300, and has been a sparkplug for the A's.

Silver Sluggers: Catcher-Stephen Vogt, 1B- Miguel Cabrera, 2B- Jason Kipnis, 3B- Manny Machado, SS- Jose Iglesias, OF- Mike Trout, OF- Lorenzo Cain, OF- J.D. Martinez, DH- Nelson Cruz

Comeback Player of the Year: Prince Fielder- After neck surgery and a lot of doubts about his returning to full strength, Fielder came back and would be the best first baseman in the American League if it weren't for Miggy.

National League:
MVP: Paul Goldschmidt- In an very close vote, Goldschmidt just edges out Bryce Harper for this spot because of his stolen bases.

Cy Young: Zack Greinke- In the midst of the fourth longest scoreless innings streak since 1961, Greinke currently holds this spot, but could possibly lose it to Max Scherzer if Greinke doesn't produce as well in the second half.

Rookie of the Year: Tied- Joc Pederson and Kris Bryant- In many circumstances, Pederson would be the clear winner, but a batting average that hovers around .230 makes it hard to say he has a clear win over the much anticipated rookie season of Kris Bryant.

Silver Sluggers: Catcher- Buster Posey, 1B- Paul Goldschmidt, 2B- Dee Gordon, 3B- Todd Frazier, SS- Troy Tulowitzki, OF- Bryce Harper, OF- Charlie Blackmon, OF- AJ Pollock, Pitcher- Madison Bumgarner

Comeback Player of the Year: Joey Votto- after hitting only 6 homers and having a severe decline in his average, Votto has nearly tripled his homer total from last season and is once again hitting with a good batting average.

Grande Doubles Down on Stupid; Still No Apology

On the night of July 4 in Lake Elsinore, California, a 22 year old woman licked two donuts and spit on two more at an independent shop. Normally something like this would merit some sort of arrest, even if it is only on misdemeanor charges. In this occasion, the culprit in question is pop star Ariana Grande. Compounding the problem is the fact that video captured her saying, "What the f*** is that? I hate Americans. I hate America."

While a large portion of America did go after the singer for her actions and words, a large segment also defended her actions or claimed that they were taken out of context despite the video appearing on the news and online in its entirety without edits. Her fans claimed she was being victimized by an overzealous media. The real victim, at least initially in all of this is that Wolfee Donuts took a hit from the Riverside County Health Department, a hit on their shrink (lost dollars for those unsure of that term), and for many others siding with Grande, a hit on their business reputation.

The incident occurred late at night (the donut shop is open 24 hours) while the staff was in the process of making more donuts for the next business day. An employee, excited that the platinum selling artist was in her shop, showed Grande the freshly made donuts at the star's request. While Grande asked to see more donuts, the employee left the trays she originally brought out on top of the glass display case. This is not what they normally do, but a star struck employee made the mistake. There was no way for the employee to know that someone who has performed all over the world, was about to commit a crime that would cost the shop four dollars...initially.

Video leaked out and shop owner Joe Marin tried to press charges initially. Instead of charges ever being placed against Grande, the health department showed up at the shop and downgraded their health rating to a B. It may not sound bad right off hand as many students would gladly take a B as a grade in a class, but for a restaurant, it's extremely bad.

In a move to save her reputation, Grande released two different apologies, neither of which apologized to the owner of Wolfee Donuts. Instead, she addressed the issue of the hating America comments. She tried to say it's because of her issues with Americans and their eating habits, but no apology to the shop owner. Instead, her move was to save face with the rest of America, essentially playing damage control for her career.

At one point, her publicity team even tried to say that in the video, she is misquoted because they claimed she said, "I hate bear claws." Watch the video and judge for yourself. It's easy to hear what she really said.

Many in the local community rallied behind the donut shop thought. The Lake Elsinore Storm even held a promotional night on July 15, giving away a 1,000 donuts to those in attendance. Grande supporters complained that Wolfee Donuts gained sales because of the incident, but it's probably not the way Marin would have liked to do this, especially while it damaged his shop's health rating.

In the second apology video that Grande posted online, people expected for her to finally apologize to the shop for her actions, but she never did. She doubled-down on stupid and continued to talk about her personal issues with American eating habits.

Another side issue that arose was that it started to be reported by almost every news source that covered the incident, that Marin dropped the charges. This too is wrong. In an interview on Toronto's KISS 92.5, Marin stated that he never dropped the charges, but instead the authorities had decided that they would not charge her with a crime. They asked Marin what the cost of each donut was and he responded that they cost a dollar a piece, causing a total of four dollars in physical damage. Indecisive on what to charge her with, the authorities dropped the charges and Marin won't get his justice from Grande.

While it may only be four dollars in damage, this still has to be an arrestable offense. If a regular Joe Schmo caused four dollars of damage in any restaurant or retail shop, they can be charged with a misdemeanor. So why not Grande? It may carry only a minor slap on the wrist, but the process of the whole legal situation should hopefully be enough to detour Grande from pulling more childish pranks like that. She's 22 years old. Despite looking like a 12 year old, she should have enough of a brain to know what she did is wrong and that there are repercussions to what she did. Letting her go free only emboldens her to possibly do other childish pranks in the future, much like how Justin Bieber has continually acted like a kid.

But most of all, Marin is owed a direct apology from Grande. She has yet to do this and until she does, she will have proven to the public that she has not learned anything from her stunts that hurt a small business owner.

Photo of Wolfee Donuts by author Daniel Millhouse
Photo of Ariana Grande is a screencap from the Victoria's Secret Fashion Show

RPGs Killed the Choose Your Own Adventure Star

Before electronics made its way into the everyday lives of American kids, imagination was the best tool in a kid's playtime experience. The only games that existed were the occasional pinball machine that might be at a movie theater or pizza joint, but even these machines didn't offer much to a the creative development of a child. Even as the 1970s came around, video game systems were not the norm in the average American household.

Then Edward Packard created a concept that would spark kids to read even more. In 1979, through Bantam Books, the first national run of Choose Your Own Adventure books would be released. The idea not only led to kids reading the books, but becoming more personally involved in the story because they felt they controlled the direction of the story. No longer were stories just linear to them. They could branch out into multiple directions and could be reread over and over, providing the child with a different ending each time. No longer was the child assured a "happy ending". There were actual consequences to their choices.

Between 1979 to 1998, Bantam Books released 185 different books that grossed over 250 million dollars. The concept ended up creating a genre of books called "gaming books" and other publishers began to copy the concept using their own in-house writers.

With the popularity of video games growing and a new genre of gaming gaining traction, the choose your own adventure style books eventually died off. Role playing video games and sandbox style games attracted kids who would have most likely enjoyed the gaming style books if the RPG genre of video games didn't exist.

While there were some games that offered you to make your own choices such as Oregon Trail, RPG style games such as the Final Fantasy series, Dragon Quest, Lineage, and Diablo started pulling more kids into playing video games. Games didn't have to be linear such as Super Mario Bros. or shooter-style. RPG style games essentially replaced the choose your own adventures books.

Turn based strategy games such as Civilization and Age of Empires eventually drew in adults and The Sims, a strategic life-simulation brought teens deeper into the video game market.

With the RPG genre taking off, choose your own adventure books were doomed. No longer did you have to imagine the story in your head. You saw it on the screen. You could hear the voices of the characters. You could physically see the action take place on your TV screen or computer monitor. Everything came to life right before you, especially as game developers continually enhanced the graphics of their games and the virtual worlds deepened.

Hints of RPG style playing bled into other genres of games. As Batman, your choices in actions and even conversation could lead to a different ending in the Arkham series. Even sports games such as the 2K series games added RPG elements to the create-your-player feature.

So with the death of the choose your adventure genre in books otherwise known as gaming books, is it possible that RPG games could see a form of entertainment that could kill that genre? On one of Kevin Smith's Podcasts, he revealed that he had conversations with other movie executives over the idea. An idea that at the theater would require audience participation in some form, whether it be through touchpads, smartphone apps, or just verbally out loud. A movie project like this would be massive and probably cost an extraordinary amount of money, but the technology to make this a reality already exists. Could choose your own adventure movies be around the corner? If so, could they kill the RPG video game genre? Probably not. The best bet would be a virtual world simulator, especially if it could be priced where the majority of Americans could buy it.

Picture is a screencap from Batman: Arkham City game

Stuffing the Ballot Box?

Today, the MLB announced that they deleted between 60 to 65 million all-star ballot votes. Up until today, out of the eight field positions and the designated hitter position, Royals players led the votes in every position except for one of the outfield spots which was held by Mike Trout.

Now while it's hard to argue that several of the Royals aren't deserving of an all-star spot, it's hard to make a case for a player such as their second baseman Omar Infante. Beating out the Astros' Jose Altuve to this point, Infante is only hitting .227 with no homeruns, no stolen bases, and only 18 RBI's. Maybe if he had a glove like Ozzie Smith, could some sort of case be made, but Infante doesn't possess a strong glove either.

So far the MLB hasn't revealed how they determined which votes to delete and which ones they kept or even how it has affected the voting so far. If they deleted all votes in the Kansas City area, then Royals players who are deserving of being considered an all-star such as Salvador Perez, Eric Hosmer, Mike Moustakas, and Alex Gordon will be hurt in the process. Plus who's to say that another team wasn't stuffing the ballot box too, but just not as well as some suspected the Royals of doing.

Officials from the MLB insist that they haven't found any signs of cheating and have even cited that strong following the Royals have built online in the past couple of years. Even so, they still threw out millions of votes. One in five votes approximately since 300 million votes have been tallied so far, on pace to break the all-time mark of 350 million taken in 2012. This also takes in the fact that the MLB stopped accepting paper ballots at the games, converting the whole process to online only.

So with everything online now, could the Royals be the team that has cheated in some form or at least "stuffed the ballots" better than any other team? Rob Neyer of Fox Sports said on the subject, "But I’ve talked myself into thinking that nobody has hijacked the balloting this year. If only because if it were that easy, a) somebody would have done it before, and b) somebody would be doing it this year, for some other team."

While voters have been restricted to 35 votes per email address, the average online user has multiple email addresses. Is this really different than the paper ballots though? In the past, it was suspected that employees of ball clubs would fill out a massive amount of ballots, favoring their own team's players, and stuff the boxes with those ballots. Doing it this way, it is a lot easier to stuff the ballot box in favor of your team than it would be online.

So how would the MLB remedy this? Should a system be setup based on players stats purely that send them to the all-star game? If this is the case, then players such as Cal Ripken Jr. or Derek Jeter would have never got to have their last hurrah in the spotlight, which led to some of the game's most memorable moments.

Should players vote? While this seems the most fair, players in the past have also carried grudges against particular opponents that would eliminate some of the best players who were less likeable. Imagine if there was an all-star game in the early 20th century, but Ty Cobb never made it because he was so hated. Cobb was one of the best players of all-time, but he was also one of the most hated by his opponents.

Should the writers vote? This could have been a viable solution pre-internet and television just as it was originally with the Hall of Fame voting process, but even writers have shown that they too have biases against players that they don't like. If the writers were in control of the all-star ballots, players like Barry Bonds would have had a lot of trouble getting into the all-star game.

The best solution is to limit the ballots a fan could submit. With the 35 votes per email address, it is worth it for a "fan" to create multiple email addresses and vote 35 times with each email address. I suggest limiting the votes to one vote per email address. This way it is not really worth it for a "fan" to create multiple email addresses and vote because of the hassle it would create. The true votes would still go through and just like the political election process, each person's vote would carry no more weight than the next person.

The Best Rookie Class of Major League Baseball

In Major League Baseball, every year that passes brings a crop of new talent to replace the players that have retired, released, or were injured throughout the season. Some players make their debut with an extraordinary amount of hype and others sneak up on the fans. Fans love to compare their favorite team's new rookie to other all-stars and legends that have played in the past, but the majority of rookies will never live up to the hype. This obviously means that some rookie classes will be better than others, especially when reviewed in hindsight. That's why I present to you the best rookie class in Major League Baseball history...the 1986 class.

The rookies of the year for 1986 were Jose Canseco for the American League and Todd Worrell for the National League. While there have been better rookie of the year winners, the 1986 class also featured many more players that would end up in the Hall of Fame, all-star rosters, and became impact players for their organizations.

Players such as Barry Larkin, Barry Bonds, Will Clark, Kevin Mitchell, Bobby Bonilla, John Kruk, Wally Joyner, Danny Tartabull, Ruben Sierra, Andres Galarraga Robby Thompson, Darren Daulton, Bob Tewksbury, Kelly Gruber, Cecil Fielder, Cory Snyder, Bobby Witt, Dan Plesac, Terry Mulholland, Mark Portugal, Doug Drabek, and Jim Deshaies exceeded their rookie limits during the 1986 season. The same season also saw the debuts of players such as Mark McGwire, Bobby Thigpen, Jay Bell, Greg Swindell, David Cone, Bo Jackson, Kevin Seitzer, Terry Steinback, Kevin Brown, Pete Incaviglia, Mike Stanley, Mitch Williams, Fred McGriff, Duane Ward, Greg Maddux, Jaime Moyer, Rafael Palmeiro, Kal Daniels, Dave Magadan, John Smiley, Bip Roberts, and Benito Santiago. The 1986 class would provide some of the most important players for the next decade in Major League Baseball.

This includes the all-time home run leader (Barry Bonds) , one of the best shortstops of all-time (Barry Larkin), the debuts of one of the best pitchers of all-time (Greg Maddux), and several other players that would arguably be in the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame (Rafael Palmeiro, Fred McGriff, Jose Canseco) if not for the fact that they played during the steroids era and were either suspected of cheating, caught cheating, or just overlooked because of the era their power peaked.

This class had it all. Power, speed, defense, pitching, closers, and team leaders. It even had a two sport star in Bo Jackson. While some of these players might not have been the nicest guys in baseball, they definitely had the most talent as a rookie class.

The only classes that could rival the 1986 class of rookies is the 1951 class (Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, and Minnie Minoso) and the 1982 class (Ryne Sandberg, Wade Boggs, and Cal Ripken Jr.).

Picture shown is 1986 Donruss Wally Joyner rookie card

California Infrastructure in Dire Need of Repair

In California, it's inevitable that a large earthquake will occur again. While the shaking ground may seem second nature to those who live in California, the majority of the shaking is barely noticeable at all to the residents. Even then, when a stronger magnitude quake strikes, the first thought in many Californian's heads is if the particular quake they're experiencing is the next big one. But what if it was?

While California won't fall into the ocean like some movies such as Escape From L.A. and San Andreas, there is the real threat of significant damage, especially within the state's infrastructure. As with the rest of the country, much of California's infrastructure is susceptible to massive damage due to the neglect by the government to maintain what has already been built.

In a report released by the United States government, one in nine bridges are deemed dangerous. Seven-term Republican congressman Ray LaHood who was the secretary of transportation during President Barack Obama's first term, has been quoted as saying, "I don't want to say they're unsafe. But they're dangerous."

In California, residents have already witnessed what can happen when infrastructure collapses. In 1989, the Loma Prieta earthquake struck the San Francisco Bay area while the country watched on TV. With game two of the World Series underway, the ground shook violently to a peak magnitude of 6.9 during rush hour. Thankfully because of the Series, the rush hour was considerably lighter than normal, but highest number of fatalities due to the quake occurred because of infrastructure failure.

Forty-two people were killed due to the Cypress Street Viaduct collapse on Interstate 880, when the upper deck portion of the double decker freeway collapsed, crushing cars on the lower deck. More famously, the upper deck of the Oakland Bay Bridge collapsed onto the lower deck, fortunately killing only one, but still scaring America as they watched the national news coverage of the chaos.

Southern California isn't immune to the infrastructure damage caused by earthquakes either. In 1994, Northridge was struck by a 6.7 earthquake at 4:30AM. Interstates 5 and 10 both suffered massive damage to their freeway bridges, as did California State Freeways 14, 118, and the 210. Several Cal State Universities suffered massive damage as did 11 hospitals that had to transfer patients out to other hospitals that escaped severe damage.

Because of the damage caused by the Northridge earthquake, California's legislature passed laws to strengthen building codes, but many of the roads, bridges, and dams were ever touched. This leaves nearly 20 percent of the bridges in California to be rated a D- by structural inspectors.

America itself has over 70,000 bridges, which means approximately 8,000 of them are in dire need of repair. Congress needs to step up before bridges start collapsing like they have in Minnesota and Washington. California needs infrastructure repair work even more because of the possibility of earthquakes. Without a public works program in place, deaths and disaster are a high possibility in the state of California.

Photo by Robert A. Eplett for FEMA

Umpires on the Offensive

In professional sports, it's not uncommon for emotions to run high, especially in pressure situations. Sometimes when this happens and the outcome doesn't go a player's way, on occasion they'll voice their frustrations at those officiating the game. Baseball is no different, but in more recent years a new trend appears to be rising. The umpires are the ones on the "attack".

An umpire is supposed to be an unbiased official who calls the game down the middle. As fans know, this doesn't always seem to the case, but for the most part umpires do try their best when calling balls and strikes, out or safe, foul or fair. When a player or coach disagrees with the umpire and voices their opinion, it's not usually a personal attack on the umpire, but rather something that is more heat of the moment. With this in mind, as long as the player or coach doesn't go on a cussing tirade on the umpire or put on a physical show that for some fans can almost be comedic, an umpire will usually and is supposed to give a little leeway to those who disagree with him.

In the last couple of years though, some of Major League Baseball's umpires have been the aggressor, making the call, then attacking the player the that the call was against. As an official, an umpire needs to be more of a rock and less emotional on the field. Yes, they're human, but at the same time they need to keep their composure more than anyone else on that field. It's hard enough being a player, especially at the pro level, but to have not only your opponent trying to beat you, but also the umpire trying to pick a fight with you, is enough to make a player snap.

In the Atlanta Braves game against the Pittsburgh Pirates on June 7, pitcher Alex Wood was clearly not getting the same calls as the opposing pitcher, Gerrit Cole. Though not happy, Wood kept his composure for the most part. He never said a word to the home plate umpire Mark Carlson and with his body language, never showed Carlson up either. Wood bit his tongue while the inning continued. After the third out, while walking to the dugout, Carlson followed Wood to the dugout and starts arguing with the Braves pitcher. Wood kept his cool, never yelling, never cussing, and he even smiled for a second as the conversation from his end appeared to be more casual. If you watch the video closer, it appears that Wood mouths the words "Please stop this" to Carlson, referring to Carlson's aggressiveness. That's when Carlson tossed the Braves pitcher out of the game.

"As I was walking away, I guess he decided that it was going to be good to throw me out of the game, which I didn't think was appropriate," Wood said in the postgame interview. "I didn't try and show him up, didn't say anything to him during the inning, didn't even know I got tossed until I got up into the clubhouse."

"I thought they were just talking," said Braves manager Fredi Gonzalez.

Other similar ejections have occurred this season as well. Bryce Harper felt the wrath of umpire Marvin Hudson and no one on the Washington Nationals even to this day knows why. After calling a (bad) strike on Harper, in a game against the New York Yankees on May 21, Harper stepped out of the box and gradually shook his head. He kept his mouth shut and his head shake wasn't exaggerated by any means. Out of the blue, Hudson tossed Harper.

Hudson was later quoted as saying, "...one thing led to another and I had to run him. I had to eject him."

He offered no exact explanation of why though. Nationals manager Matt Williams was yelling at Hudson from the dugout, but if anything, Hudson should have ejected Williams, not Harper.

When the instant replay rule was instituted, part of the rule that was passed along with it was that managers and players can't argue with the call after the replay call has been made, otherwise there would be an instant ejection. Some people wondered if this would lead to a possible build up of aggression by the players or managers when they disagree with a call, but can't get their two cents in. The irony of it is that it appears that the umpires are the ones with the pent up aggression. Especially on balls and strikes which is the only thing left that players and managers could theoretically argue still.

Two of the top five umpires for most career ejections in Major League Baseball are currently active and are widely known for their quick tempers. "Cowboy Joe" West in a 2011 players poll was voted by 41 percent of players as the worst umpire in the MLB. He is known for his quick temper and ranks fifth on the all-time ejections list by MLB umpires.

Fourth on the all-time list is current MLB umpire Bob Davidson. During an Astros and Phillies game in May of 2012, Davidson bumped into the Phillies' catcher on a strike three passed ball, allowing the Astros hitter to reach first base safely. Davidson then yelled into the Phillies dugout "You think I wanted to block his ass?" before tossing the Phillies manager Charlie Manuel. Several days later, the MLB suspended Davidson for "repeated violations of the Office of the Commissioner's standards for situation handling". It wasn't the first time Davidson had been suspended for his actions on the field.

It's already hard enough to be a player or a manager in baseball. It doesn't help when you not only feel the umpire is purposely miscalling the game, but then the umpire goes on the offensive if you don't look happy about their calls. While players can frequently be suspended or fined for not agreeing with an umpire or for their actions that lead to an ejection, it's rare when an umpire is fined or suspended for their actions. If the MLB took more time to review the actions of their umpires on the field and hold them accountable, it should hopefully improve the problem. If an umpire doesn't improve his on-field actions and aggression on the field, they should be let go since there is no shortage of people trying to make it as an MLB umpire.

When Money Supersedes Morals

For as long as currency has been around, there have been people around to find ways to hurt their fellow man to gain more wealth. Whether it was snipping off pieces of gold, silver, or other valuable metal from coins, to selling out Jesus (depending on your religious and personal views) for 30 pieces of silver (most likely Tyrian shekels), or stealing a sale for commission from a fellow co-worker, people will often do things that would be against many other people's moral values.

People will fight for the almighty dollar today, step on each other's necks if they have to, but for what? When they go back home, can they honestly say to their family that they ethical in any sort of way? What happens when their kids ask a question about what's fair and what isn't when it concerns how they should treat others? Do the parents tell their kids the truth about what they have done?

Even with the way people will treat their fellow man to gain an extra dollar, it appears that things are worse today. Of course people did it in the past in different ways, but people hide it better in modern times. In the past you had people that sold "tonics" that would cure the average person, sell devices that would make you look or feel better, and even people that "sold" the Brooklyn Bridge over and over again. The thing was that most of the general public back then knew that these were conmen trying to dupe them out of their money.

Of course there have been scandals such as Bernie Madoff's pyramid scheme in the modern times, but otherwise, many of your people that set aside their integrity to make an extra dollar, are either a lot harder to detect or even accepted as just a part of everyday society. Many of the "1%" fit into this category, even if they legitimately started off trying to run an ethical business. To become extremely wealthy in today's society, it's commonly known that most of the wealthy stepped on at least a few necks to get where they are at.

But what does this say of the future? It's okay to set aside your integrity for an extra buck, as long as you hide it better or make a lot of money? If more and more people today don't teach their kids that morals should outweigh the power of making an extra dollar at the expense of their fellow man, tomorrow's society can turn into a financial version of the Old West. Is that really the type of society people want their children learning and facilitating when they grow up?