How Much Is Enough?

I saw a brief news item in this morning's paper that said presidential spokesman Tony Snow was leaving his job. According to the story, he said he needs more money than the $168,000 per year that he's making now.

That brought me up short. That wasn't enough money? It occurred to me that we must live in such vastly different worlds, since I think I can live (and have lived) quite comfortably on less than one-third of what he says isn't enough. And my "less than one-third" is vastly more what the majority of people in the world are living on.

The story did mention that he is facing a recurrence of cancer. While I'm sure his current job offers health insurance, perhaps there are still uncovered costs in fighting his cancer. If that's the issue, though, what does that say about our health care system? And where does that leave the large majority of our population, who make far less money than that, when they are faced with a serious illness or injury?

I don't know Mr. Snow's reason for "needing" more money, but I think we should all think every once in a while about what true need is.

Buying Recognition

An ongoing story recently in Santa Fe has been naming a new library on the South Side. (Apparently "Santa Fe Public Library -- South Side" is too straightforward.) The powers-that-be said they'd name it after the first person to contribute $1 million. So a donation was promised, in the name of a recently-deceased liquor distributor and casino owner.

Folks protested. Most didn't raise the question of whether those activities should be honored in a building supposedly dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge and freedom of information, but over whether one should be able to buy one's way into permanent community recognition. Both, I would argue, should be valid points to raise.

In response to the protest, the family withdrew the donation. Now... wouldn't it be nobler to still donate the money, but graciously turn down the name recognition? Doesn't that tell you, right there, that the intent was to glorify the family name instead of supporting a community institution?

I wish buildings weren't named after people at all. Just name them by their functions. And if you do want to honor someone, why not honor someone who has contributed to the library through longtime volunteer work, promotion, reading to kids, or other means that required commitment and dedication, rather than money?

In a society where sports stadiums and tournaments are named after donors, though, it's become increasingly apparent that everything is for sale. Maybe next we'll have the Toyota Olympics or the Microsoft Congress.