Football, the Steelers and a Changing Moral Society

by maryrose on Jul 9, 2008 9:26 AM EDT Comment 34 comments

I was prompted to think and write about this and after Terry Bradshaw recently admitted publicly that he took doctor-prescribed steroids in the 1970s to assist in the healing process. If you saw Bradshaw play, he got banged up quite a bit, much more than any quarterback playing today.

It’s interesting to see how the microcosm of football fits into our changing society of moral intolerance.

I would never tell my daughter that men used to carry guns into church. She wouldn’t understand the Wild West. I do not want to tell her that Art Rooney Sr. once hit a woman on the streets of Pittsburgh. The woman and her husband had just beaten up one of Rooney’s friends and while Rooney was going to flatten the husband (he was a world-class boxer), the lady kept waving her umbrella at him. When she did not heed several warnings from Rooney he decked her and then pummeled the husband. The cops came along and simply took the couple to the station after dropping Rooney’s friend off at the hospital. That was the end of it.

Imagine if such were to happen today? The press coverage, the impending trial, the criminal and civil implications, all of which would saturate the public beyond imagination. The reason I will not tell my daughter this story is that she is too young to understand that you cannot judge yesterday’s actions with today’s standards.

As the world keeps changing, it becomes less and less tolerant. Back in the 30s and 40s, the Steelers and other teams traveled by train to their away games. They played cards, got drunk and sometimes got into donnybrooks with their own teammates. There were no assault charges and no photos taken. It never made the newspapers. In fact the beat writers, who were on the same train, were a part of the team fraternity. They would never expose the sanctity of the fraternity. Can you imagine today?

I remember the first Steelers’ game I ever attended. It was at Pitt Stadium in November, 1968. My uncle was Chief of Police in Bellevue, a Pittsburgh suburb. We were going to be late for the game, but Uncle Bill told me not to worry. He grabbed one of his patrolmen and put him and me into a squad car. He turned on the siren and the lights and sped all the way to Pitt Stadium non-stop. What a thrill that was for a 13-year old kid going to his very first Steelers game. In the 60s that type of thing happened.

In the 70s you could not walk into Three Rivers Stadium on a fall Sunday and not smell the aroma of marijuana all around. I was actually convinced, and still am today, that the number of older teens and young adults who regularly lit up a joint in broad daylight far outnumbered those who “just said no.” Marijuana was the “new alcohol.” It was better than booze because it didn’t affect your liver and didn’t give you a hangover. In essence, the 70s were a generation of guinea pigs. Young people just didn’t know how many brain cells pot would kill because extensive studies were too young to conclude long-term. And legally, as long as you weren’t selling it, you were in the clear. Chances are if a cop saw you walking the streets with a joint he might ask you for a hit.

Steroids took on much the same stance in the 70s. While the common man had no interest in steroids, high-level football players found them extremely beneficial. Neither the NFL nor the U.S. Government had any prohibition against steroid usage. Just like marijuana, individuals injecting steroids had little concrete evidence of what the long-term effects might be. The drugs were too young to have widespread and meaningful longitudinal studies. Players were smart enough, however, to know that they too were guinea pigs. They had enough sense to know that artificially altering a human body was not the right thing to do, but as long as there were no rules against it and the guys lining up across from you were juicing, then it was a risk worth taking, and a common one at that.

The notion that the Steelers might not have won four Super Bowls in the 70s without steroids is poppycock. The Steelers would have won just as many Super Bowls without any steroids as long as the rest of the league was equally as clean. The fact that Steve Courson wrote a book that guys from other teams didn’t write simply places the Steelers under a parochial spotlight.

It is also interesting to see the game of football itself move toward zero tolerance in an effort to mirror society. What Joe Turkey Jones did to Terry Bradshaw would result in an instant and lengthy suspension today. What Jack Lambert did to Cliff Harris would surely be an ejection. In the 1976 Super Bowl, it resulted in a “settle down fellas” warning.

The technicalities of right and wrong haven’t changed much through the years (except for cases such as steroids, which are now illegal and were not a generation ago). Intrinsically, it was just as wrong for Art Rooney to hit a woman in the Roaring Twenties as it would be for a young man to do so today. It was just as wrong for teammates to engage in fisticuffs over a gin game in the 1940s as it would be today. What has changed is society’s tolerance level, or lack thereof.

This is due in part, to whatever extent you want to argue, to the massive influx in media coverage. The advent of the internet, the explosion of cable and satellite television, and the powerful impact that national publications such as USA-Today have all feasted on the carcass of human frailty. Step out of line and you will now pay dearly for any act of indiscretion.

It is fair to assume that a young Art Rooney or a bunch of guys playing cards would be smart enough to not make those same decisions in the 21^st century. Surely they would be keenly aware of, and react according to, the legal and public relations consequences of the times. Fewer young people today are indulging in street drugs and those who do are not blatantly walking into football stadiums with them. A crime is only as great as its corresponding punishment. My daughter is not old enough yet to comprehend that.

In many ways our society today is better than ever. Airplanes and restaurants are not filled with smoke. Sex is not as promiscuous in mainstream America as it was a generation ago. Drugs are the exception instead of the rule. Bras aren’t being burned on some street corner protest and barroom brawls actually result in liable consequences. In football, steroids and street drugs are in check with testing and excessive violence is curbed by fines and suspensions. These are all good things.

On the flip side, it saddens me to see America lose some of its charm. Nontraditional innocence such as a kid racing to a ballgame in a squad car has long since passed us by. You hear stories of kids getting cut from teams who turn around and sue the coach for pain and suffering and future lost wages. That makes me sick. Our world is becoming so litigious we need to think twice before pranks and practical jokes that were once common.

I will not tell my daughter about the goings on in fraternities back in my college days. She will listen with today’s ear to the stories of yesterday, and that is not fair. Someday she will be mature enough, as we keep heading down the path of intolerance and social perfection, to understand that we should never judge yesterday’s crime with today’s jury.

2 recs | Comment 34 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Society

not only has fallen to zero tolerance, but zero responsibility. if someone’s makes mistakes it’s because of TV, or something else blah blah, not the parents. if someone gets in a car accident they sue and try to say it’s the car manufacturer’s fault or something else ridiculous, as opposed to driver error (which car accidents almost ALWAYS are a result of). if someone can’t stop themselves from eating Oreo’s because they are fat and lazy they sue Oreo’s maker Nabisco for having “trans fat” in their foods (this actually happened), and blames them getting fat on the trans fat in the food! because all the other kinds of fat that person was eating don’t do anything. instead of people in NYC taking responsibility for their own diets they have the local government pass a ban on using certain cooking oils with lots of trans fat, costing the government, and thus taxpayers money to enforce such ridiculous laws. it truly disgusts me and people need to take a look in the mirror and take responsibility for their own lives, their own actions, and even of the actions of the people close to them (children, friends, etc)

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 10:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

"if someone's makes mistakes...."

supposed to read “if someone’s child makes mistakes it’s because of TV….”

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The PR industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. Companies wouldn’t spend billions of dollars flooding our society w/ slogans like, “I’m lovin’ it!” or “ask your doctor about…” if it wasn’t wildly effective. Want creation is very, very real, and no honest Marketing or Advertising executive will tell you otherwise. It’s in any behavioral science textbook.

Our country spends as much on weaponry as the rest of the world combined (not soley for use, but also to sell). No country is more protectionist, in terms of subsidizing domestic industry (such as steel, agriculture, pharmaceuticals, technology, you name it), than the US. That’s why you’re taxed so much. Not because someone is fighting to lower heart disease in our society.

by kwoog on Jul 9, 2008 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Feel free to delete, Blitz. I’m not trying to cause waves.

by kwoog on Jul 9, 2008 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought we bought all that stuff on credit.

by BadMaafala on Jul 9, 2008 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

PR

They may make you want, but they don’t make you buy it.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jul 10, 2008 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

a wolfpack sighting!

I was wondering where you’d been.

by Blitzburgh on Jul 10, 2008 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

Just out of town for the 4th. I was visiting my parents up in NC. Didn’t feel like doing anything work related including booting up the computer. I’m trying to get caught up now, though. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jul 10, 2008 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Food for thought

Hey Most Violent
While I very much agree with you that we have to encourage people to take personal responsibility in all aspects of their lives, I think its fair to ask the question what are good government responses to the common ways that people fail to take individual responsibility.
One example is crack cocaine. Crack cocaine is not good for you. Despite this fact many people spend a lot of time, money and energy consuming crack cocaine. These people tend to cost society a lot of money in medical bills, lost wages and crime. For this reason, among others, we have decided as a society to fight a war on crack cocaine. We spend billions of dollars fighting this war. Its not very clear yet whether this has been a successful use of our tax payer money.
Now lets go back to the example of trans-fats. Trans-fats are also bad for you. They cost us a lot of money as society in lost wages, medical costs etc. Now people generally don’t try to kill each other for some French fries, so let’s not overstate the case, but we can agree that there is both a personal and public cost to them.
The situation gets more interesting when we look at much of the fuzzy middle concerning things which are not good for you and how society chooses to deal with them:
The list could include all sorts of drugs with the potential for abuse including: Alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, heroin, caffeine. It also includes bad diet, guns, automobiles, and
An interesting way to look at it, is to think about the leading causes of death in our country. Here is a list from 2000
Tobacco 435,0001 Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,0001 Alcohol 85,000 1 Microbial Agents 75,0001 Toxic Agents 55,0001 Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,3471 Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,0002 Suicide 30,6223 Incidents Involving Firearms 29,0001 Homicide 20,3084 Sexual Behaviors 20,0001 All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,0001, 5 Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,6006 Marijuana 07
Looking at this chart we might at least consider the idea that government should spend a little more time regulating the sale of French fries and a little less time arresting people who smoke marijuana.
I am not actually advocating legalizing pot (necessarily), but I do think it would be good for us to think more rationally about how our policies can accomplish the following:
Reduce cost to society brought about by people who do stupid shit (like smoke two packs a day, drink heavily, take crystal meth regularly or eat McDonald’s every meal)
Recognize that all of the activities I just listed are addictive behaviors and that there are many people who can’t easily control them.
Think rationally about laws that help give people the most chance to live healthy lives and the least chance to fall into really destructive habits, without at the same time trampling on our basic freedom to do stupid shit when we feel like it.
Now how to actually accomplish all of this? Well the devil is in the details. A tax on cigarettes that helps fund public health has been a nice model. What’s more we see that people will cut back on smoking if you raise the tax to 3 dollars a pack or so. Maybe we should have a fat tax too. Want to sell shit that’s really bad for people. No problem, but lets make both the consumer and producer pay for the cost to public health.
The other thing I think we can do is promote smart national food policy. Lets cut the subsidies that we we give factory farms to grow corn (which gets turned in to corn syrup and food for big hormone filled beef cows who can’t digest the shit. Let’s instead give subsidies to organic farmers. Let’s also incentive our schools to feed kids vegetables instead of coke.
As for trans-fats, I can’t say that as a New Yorker I am all that upset about the idea that they will be reduced or eliminated from our restaurants.

by SteelerBuddha on Jul 9, 2008 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

my point about trans fat

is that trans fat (and all fats) are only ever bad for you in excess. your body does require fat as part of its diet. no foods are super bad for you if you just have a small amount. i eat “hormone filled beef” a few times a week, and you won’t find a person probably in the world with a better medical record than me-you need to remember, there has never been a study that us eating cows that have been put on hormones has any effect on humans. i’m against subsidizing organic and any product that isn’t nearly as popular among consumers. people can choose what they want, i’m all for that, they should just understand on their own if they go overboard, as with anything, it could be bad for you. i don’t like the government spending money because we are too lazy to do our own homework basically. cocaine is an actual poison to the body (just like alcohol and most other controlled substances)..trans-fats are not a POISON to the body. they are bad if you have too much over a long period of time, so people should keep this in mind when they eat it, and pretty much everyone knows what foods are ‘bad’ and ‘good’, although you’d be surprised how many foods that quickly get labelled as bad are actually good for you…....but for many, many foods if you have too much over time it will be bad for you-if you don’t balance your diet or do something to “rinse” those foods out (like working out alot).

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trans Fats

You are right about trans fats only being bad for you in excess. I do think the same can be said of cocaine and alcohol. A couple of glasses a wine a day and your french person. A couple of bottles and you have no liver.

I also don’t buy every alarmist study that comes out. The point as you said is to live consciously and in moderation. But it sounds like trans fats are pretty darn bad for you in anything but tiny amounts. So why not get serious about regulating them. Millions of Americans suffer from diabetes and heart disease. Why not make it a little bit harder for them to poison themselves to death.

As for the hormone cows, the truth is I don’t know too much about health issues with it. I don’t eat that stuff because of the way the meat is produced in this country.
As for farm subsidies, I think the first order of business is getting rid of the billions we give to factory farms to grow corn and soybeans. I don’t have a problem using government policy to promote smart choices for health and the environment (for example fuel efficient cars – which we could have decided to do 25 years ago but decided to wait until gas hit 150 dollars a barrel to do)

where was I?

Oh smart choices. I really liked us drafting Mendenhall. THAT’s thinking of the future….
( :

by SteelerBuddha on Jul 9, 2008 10:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess I missed the boat on the discussion but,

I thought SteelerBuddha described the issue pretty well. It’s personal issue, but it’s also in the best interest of society to solve (or reduce) the problems. Personal and social responsibilty. It’s a balance, which is what I’d expect from a guy named SteelerBuddha. :)

by BadMaafala on Jul 11, 2008 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True

If enough people (or the elected government) determine that the overall impact to society is so great, then it is a governmental responsibility to take action to change things. If trans fat is so widespread and so dangerous that it is deemed to have a huge cost on the public (healthcare costs payed at public expense, for example), then they have a right to curtail or outlaw it. I think that is still different than the lawsuit mentality, and it is being done by elected officials, not appointed judges or a jury of only 6-12 people, depending on the type of case.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jul 11, 2008 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting read

Well thought out article as usual Rose. I’m often compelled to think what the instant access of news has had on the world. Looking at the number of natural disasters I start feeling like the world is coming to an end cause surely this is unusual, but then again, I don’t know. Even 10 years ago if a few thousand people died in a country I’d never heard of it might be a slight blip on the radar but not something that was focused on.

We’re more aware of every action of every person on the planet. 15 minutes of fame has never been more true. Every mistake made by a person in the public eye will be examined and talked about to death. This makes people somewhat more responsible, even if they’ll blame other things, the common person will blame the offender. For as much as I see MVT’s point, you’ll be hard pressed to find a person who really agrees with the fat person eating the oreos. We still hold moral values, it’s just that our legal system is bound by different rules.

It’s an amazing time to be alive. It’s also a very scary time to be alive. I don’t yet have kids, but the prospect scares me. Not because it will be hard work, which it undeniably will, but because the moment that child learns to read and use the internet all information is immediately available. When I was growing up I would look through encyclopedias and learn random stuff. But it was never complete and I never got current info. Now Rose’s daughter may not hear about the steelers games of old from him, but that doesn’t stop her learning it. That scares me. We are information gluttons, look at us and how we crave and investigate every piece of news regarding our favorite team. There are members of this sight that know more about the steelers than I’d say anyone outside the organization would have known 20 years ago.

Okay… I think I’ll stop the rambling.

by Chicago Steeler on Jul 9, 2008 10:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Scary time to be alive

Is an excellent point, especially having kids. While this may be going down another tangent, I am scared about my kids having enough money to be modest. Mine is the first generation where both the mother and father have to earn money in the workplace. I say “have to” because when I was a kid, there was no cable TV, no computers, no cell phones. I honestly can’t remember five times when I ate in a restaurant prior to high school graduation and I had never stepped on an airplane. Our once-a-year vacation was a modest drive somewhere. And I was just like all the other kids.

The money we spend today, on our kids and on ourselves, that was never spent before is unbelievable. When my oldest was a senior in high school taking her class pitcture was a $1000 ordeal, complete with portfolios and changes of clothes. I was shocked. My mom dropped me off with $15 and came back an hour later to pick me up. Simple turned real complicated. School dances are now complicated and expensive. On senior day we drove to a lake somewhere. Now they fly to Florida and then take a Disney Cruise. Graduation parties used to be chips and sodas, if you were lucky to have one, and now they are major ordeals. Every day today is more complicated and expensive than the corresponding day a generation ago.

I could go on an on but I won’t bore you. Bottom line is that in order to keep up with the modest Jonses and the modern amenities, my kids need to make enough money and that worries me. The reaction is that now both parents need to work and that causes a whole new set of problems and stresses raising kids, which is yet another tangent I won’t take you down.

by maryrose on Jul 9, 2008 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

access to news is a good thing. just remember who is feeding it to you and why

by tkired on Jul 9, 2008 10:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Silly lawsuits

i would agree we have FAR too much litigation in this country, but before you blame that fatty stuffin oreos down their gullett, watch Super Size Me, a documentary inspired by the McDonald’s lawsuit.

by tkired on Jul 9, 2008 10:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

eyes opened?

don’t most people know that Oreo’s, McD’s and other stuff like that are not healthy foods? i think most people have known that way before Super Size Me. i don’t understand what is so shocking about super size me, if i have mcdonalds for breakfast and dinner in the same day i feel awful. i agree with the point below though, you can go wherever you want.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

supersize me

is a great flick, really opens your eyes to the fast food industry. But the basic priciple of free will still applies. TheMostViolentTeam is right. Responsibilty. YOU don’t have to go to McDonalds to eat. YOU don’t have to eat Oreos. YOU don’t have to go to a restaurant to eat where there is smoking.

As for Rose’s article, great piece that really got me thinking about the state of things in our country today. I would have to say in my humble opinion, that the advent of the 24 hr cable news channel has destroyed whatever innocence was left in this country. CNN, FoxNews, HNN, these channels have gotten absolutely ridiculous in the shit that they cover as ‘news’. They dig deep into everyone’s personal lives, they report on inane blather like Obama bowling, and they thrust death, doom and despair to even the smallest corner of the country. I’m not saying that as Americans we shouldn’t see what’s happening at all, but its a constant stream of fear and gloom. Taxes, gas prices, the war, crime, terrorism, etc.

So I pose a question. Are we as a country truly happier now than say, 40 years ago? Is it just my imagination that during my parents generation it was a happier time? Rose responded just now about both parents having to work. When peeps used to ask me what my mom did, they were almost always shocked to hear that she was a housewife. ‘She didn’t work?’ Nope. My dad, not a college grad, worked one job and supported a wife and 7 kids. Absolutely no way a man can do that today. Sure, there have been advances in communications, medicine and transportation. But really, just how much have those positively affected our lives? Communications just make us busier and ruder(the guy that walks into a store, restaurant, bank on the phone and contiues talking while someone is trying to help you). The internet is great and I use it everyday. But so do hackers and pedophiles. Identity fraud is rampant and growing exponentially every year. Medicine? Sure, advances have been great. But how many of us can actually afford what it costs? My father is over 200K in debt due to trying (unsucessfully) to keep my mother alive from breast cancer. Transportation just keeps getting more and more expensive. Cars are more expensive and get worse gas mileage, and are more cheaply built. Just doing a quick search on google shows that the average car in 2005 cost 27,958. I know I don’t have to bring up gas prices. High gas makes air travel through the roof. Fuel costs raise food costs. Groceries are at an all-time high. The country’s infrastructure is falling apart.

I hesitate to post this, due to its not really about football, and it sounds very gloomy. I’m actually a very positive and happy person, but I think that that it mainly due to my being a type B personality. I just don’t worry. Life is what you make of it, but it just seems to be getting harder to make something good out of it.

by steelerark on Jul 9, 2008 11:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

not to nit-pick

but many of the prices you cite are not at all time highs when you adjust for inflation, and you have to also factor in that the standard of living in the United States is also far beyond everyone else. we have been long overdue for a downward adjustment to our economy. economic cycles are up, down, in-between, we’ve been basically up for the better part of 25 years now! the dot-com bubble burst was not a major economic downturn so much as it was a stock market correction (and the stock market is not an accurate barometer of the overall economy). anyways, getting off topic now but whatever. good discussion.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually real wages have stagnated in the past 30+ years, whereas essential services (shelter, health care, education) have sky-rocketted. Ie, the widespread majority of Americans are much, much worse off than they were 30 years ago, in almost every measurable.

by kwoog on Jul 9, 2008 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

correct

but i said nothing about real wages. what measurables are you speaking of that we are worse off from 30 years ago? jobs are created at a fantastic rate in this country, compared to other developed nations. that is why we are such an attractive target for immigrants, and that is a major factor in the widening wealthy-poor gap in this country, and why our government is burdened with debt. because taxpayers (voters) demand everytime we are in even a TINY recession the government must do something, the government is forced to either spend money to help fix the problem, or to cut taxes (lowering its revenue) to help fix the problem. if people would just accept that we will have downturns regularly for small periods. as im writing this i see steelerarks post, so let me address that; you know why we are taxed so much? because the american consumer practically demands it. as i just said, anytime there is even a slight economic downturn, the average person FREAKS out about the economy and begs the government to do something, which they always do because the politicians want to get re-elected. unfortunately the average american isn’t educated or smart enough to understand the basic economic cycle and to just let it go. our being taxed a ton is a byproduct of the average Americans demanding continuous economic growth/stimulation from the government. i completely agree that taxes are out of control, but you can look right in the mirror (of the general population of america) as to the reason why.

and not to sound crass, but why is it ridiculous that 10% of people are below the poverty line? guess how we could fix that 10%....by raising taxes and giving them subsidies or other services to help them get their heads above water. this is a capitalist driven economy and society. there will be winners and losers. and again, i know that’s crass, but it’s fact. we are not a socialist state. part of the reason americans have to work more, is for the most part, americans want to be able to do more “material” things (although there is no way to quantify this). take my current town of San Diego, TONS of young people move here and just scrape by making rent, utilities etc, just because they want to be near the beach/great weather. there are many in this country who choose to “just make ends meet” because they are where they want to be. they could move to Buffalo where there is supremely cheap housing, and have much more disposable income. it’s a great standard of living because for the most part (as in, the majority of the population), has the ability to go where they want to go and try to do the things they want to do, whether or not they succeed is up to them. (note, i may need to revise this post after re-reading, went in many different directions im sure)

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no worries on the writing style,

most of us are all over the place on posts like this. Btw, nice new feature of the site that allows you to see when people post while you are reading or writing a reply.

So you’re saying that the overtaxation in this country is due to americans upset about the economy? Where do you get that?

by steelerark on Jul 9, 2008 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

why i need to revise:

it’s one of many factors why we are overtaxed. (and i will expound upon that later, but i need to get some work done)

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

the branch I am at now is so slow, only 2 peeps have come in all day today. But I can agree that its one of the many factors.

by steelerark on Jul 9, 2008 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

most definitely agree about

the market not being a good indicator, but in no way is our standard of living far beyond anyone else.

http://www.undp.org

In two different indices, the UN states that the US is low on the pole compared to other developed countries. We our 17th out of 19 developed countries on the HPI, Human Poverty Index and 12 on the HDI, human development Index.

The World Bank reports our Gross National Income for 2007 was 19th, even though GDP was 1st overall, well ahead of the next in line. Here’s an interesting article about quality of life.

http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/quality_of_life.pdf

Here the US ranks 13th. Now I am not saying the US is close the third world status, far from it. But to say that our standard of living is way beyond everyone else is just off base. We are over-taxed, over-worked and increasingly underpaid. Taxes are out of control. Take New Jersey, who recently had a budget crisis. Due to this crisis, they shut down all state run functions, which happens to include casinos, since they are state regulated. It was estimated that New Jersey lost 1.5 million dollars a day in tax revenue. Now tell me how a state that gets 500 million in taxes a year, income that most states do not get, i.e. gambling revenue, get into a budget crisis? Taxes are out of control here. You buy a house, you’re taxed. You’re taxed every year while you own it. You sell it? You’re taxed. Can you name one thing you can do in this country without paying taxes in some way inderictly or directly? Sales tax, food tax, phone tax, death tax, income tax, property tax, gas tax, travel tax, ss tax, state income tax, luxury tax, inheritance tax. Shit. To think the Revolutionary War started because of a 3% tea tax.

Economists William Thompson and Joseph Hickey in 2005 stated that 84% of Americans fall in the lower middle class and below, with less than 1% of the population controlling most of the country’s wealth.

US Census Bureau reports that the official poverty level for a family of four is $20,614. 10% of our nation is below that poverty line, which in itself is ridiculous. Like any family of four can make it at $21,000 today.

Take our jobs. The average Brit gets 4-6 weeks vacay a year. The average American? 2. The average american struggles just to make ends meet, with just about every household needing two jobs to make it. How is that a great standard of living?

by steelerark on Jul 9, 2008 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for posting despite hesitation

Stealerark (remember your handle spelling changed after your national heriocs to thwart a bank heist)...Actually this was the discussion i was hoping for while we await training camp…To answer your question quickly, I actually think I am both happier yet more stressed out than my parents, if that makes any sense whatsoever.

by maryrose on Jul 9, 2008 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

great point

about happier but also more stressed…....the typical trappings of a superpower developed economy. Rome, Greece, Egypt, probably felt the same stresses (obviously applied differently). you can definitely be happier because there are opportunities more and more to do some amazing things, but also feel more stressed because it requires alot of effort and time to be able to do these things that weren’t at all previously available.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jul 9, 2008 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol,

forgot about stealerark :)

by steelerark on Jul 9, 2008 12:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

question

Obviously I believe you mary rose, but was marijuana that common at the games? Was this at stadiums across the league or was it just Pittsburgh?

Also, when did that start to change noticeably?

by Blitzburgh on Jul 9, 2008 5:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Common is a relative term

Compared to a Who concert, or even Elton John, marijuana stench was not nearly as prevalent at a football game. Concerts were complete smoke-outs, especially indoors. A nun would be high as a kite in five minutes just from breathing. However, even at football games, the Steelers being no different than anyone else, when you walked through the concourse, you didn’t take too many steps before a new strain of pot could be smelled. Football is an open-air facility so it probably went on more than could be smelled. Let’s put it this way, if you wanted it and didn’t have it, you could find a willing donor in less than five minutes. It began to curtail in the late 70s and stayed at a lower plateau until the early 80s, when it lowered to another level.

by maryrose on Jul 9, 2008 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bigger Stronger Faster

Thank you Maryrose for the great post.
I have a lot of stuff to say in response, but I wanted to start by strongly recommending the movie Bigger Stronger Faster http://www.biggerstrongerfastermovie.com/ . It’s a great look at steroids, but really it examines many of the issues that you laid out in your post. What makes something right or wrong, what is it in the character of a people in general and American’s in specific that leads us to our current crazy situation around steroids.
The movie does a very good job of presenting many different view points, while never comfortably settling into supporting one view.
You walk out of the movie laughing, shaking your head and thinking very hard about what the gap between what we say we believe and how we behave.

by SteelerBuddha on Jul 9, 2008 6:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

First and foremost

Thanks to all of you for sharing such thoughtful and stimulating thoughts. Thanks especially to Maryrose for getting the ball rolling. I don’t think anyone need be too apologetic for this not being a football topic. These are the kind of issues that drive some of us to embrace football more intensely.

I realize in reading the comments of Steelerark and Maryrose in particular how much this country has changed in the last 40 years. I remember when people laughed at the idea of cable television because no one could imagine paying for the priviledge of watching TV. Now even relatively poor families shell out hundreds of dollars for cable and satellite packages. The internet as we use it today was barely conceivable 20 years ago. This site is one of the benefits. Problems include things such as easy, discrete access to pornography, which is becoming something of a subtle moral crisis in a lot of households. I feel like the proverbial frog being slowly boiled to death sometimes with all the added pressures to consume.

Here’s one that Maryrose didn’t mention but I’m sure is on his radar. Used to be that you only had to worry about buying that one great dress for prom (and another for her wedding). Now you got to get a dress for the homecoming dance!!! Wear the same dress for prom? Dream on dear reader. Not wanting to sound too much like my ancestors, but it does seem like we were poorer, yet happier in the good ol’ days.

by RickVa on Jul 9, 2008 8:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Great overall discussion

I don’t want to get too into it, just because I think many of these issues, that impact everyone so much, are so often tied to politics. But, that being said, this was an excellent post, and very interesting discussion following it. I did want to touch on a couple of points.

First, maryrose made a great point about how their is no good argument that the Steelers wouldn’t have won their SBs in the 70s without steroids. This has been a favorite argument of Pats* fans (see Bill Simmons) to rationalize their cheating this decade. The very important distinction that steroids were not yet regulated in 70s kills that argument immediately. Add to that the fact that most teams in the NFL had players using steroids, and it’s pretty obvious that playing field was level.

Second, I generally agree with most of what TMVT said about personal responsibility. Sure, there are PR companies whose jobs are to create in us a feeling of wanting what they sell, but they don’t force us to buy their products. I saw Super-Size Me, and I still eat a McGriddles every so often. But, I realize that it’s my choice. I don’t think that I should be able to get a million dollar award because I chose to eat something that I knew wasn’t the most healthy thing for me. IMO, that sort of approach is more like an enabler, telling someone you can just do what you feel like without self control. The courts will just make someone else pay for the consequences.

And, as far as the economy goes, I just can’t see how it’s possible that a majority of people are worse off overall than 30 years ago. Thirty years ago, I was 5, we had one TV, one van, rented a house from my mom’s uncle, and there were no computers, no cell phones, no VCRs, DVD players, etc. Now, even those under the poverty level often have multiple TVs, everyone has a cell phone, most families have multiple cars. Things that were considered luxuries back then are considered necessities now. I don’t have economic data in front of me, but I look around, and it seems that just about everybody has more comfort than back then. Now, I will say that there have definitely been pockets of the country that have probably stagnated economically (for example western PA, where I was born). I think a big reason is that the companies there saw that they could move to the southeast and hire people for less, without unions. Some would blame the companies, but the wage disparity had to have been huge for companies to pay the costs of moving and building new facilities when they had existing ones. And, I believe that in many cases, they still paid the new employees more than those people could have made prior those companies moving there. I fully realize that this is not data, I’m relying on anecdotal evidence from when I moved from PA to NC. So, I should just end here.

Anyway, another good post, ‘rose. Thanks.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jul 10, 2008 6:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs