Letters: Op-ed critical of MLB’s pitch clock is spot on

Jeffery Vacante’s op-ed (“Baseball is losing its essence to the pitch clock,” July 14) about the MLB pitch clock is spot on. Until then, I was feeling like the only baseball fan who was skeptical about speeding up the game.

A faster game on TV is fine, but at the ballpark, I’m in no rush. A three-hour game? No problem! If I lived close to Wrigley Field or Sox Park and went to many games during the season, then I’d probably feel differently. But when going to a game is a special occasion, and it takes a lot of effort just to get there, please don’t put my experience on the clock.

Like Vacante said, baseball was always intended to be a refuge from the fast-paced outside world. The pitch clock is probably here to stay, but I’ll never be a fan.

— Jeff Reiter, Glen Ellyn

Baseball as a bore fest

In an op-ed on the baseball pitch clock, assistant professor Jeffery Vacante laments that timing the game has caused it to lose its essence, that it has drifted from the relaxed, untimed pastoral escape of decades past.

The problem with that thinking is that in more recent decades, the game has turned into a three-hour-plus bore fest with much wristband adjustment at the plate and long inactivity on the mound. What Vacante fails to acknowledge is that the pitch clock is returning the game to the approximately 2 1/2 hours it took to play in the long-ago past for which he longs.

— Walter Gibson, Green Lake, Wisconsin

Anger toward older people

I was surprised at the level of anger exhibited by a letter writer pertaining to his belief that old people have ruined the country and could care less about young people (“Let younger leaders take charge,” July 15).

He also exhibits a clear disdain for capitalism, which is our country’s economic base and has been since its inception. I’m not sure what that has to do with age. For example, many young people have benefited from capitalism and have accrued wealth with age.

Nonetheless, I agree with some of his points. In the past 50 years, our country and its political and corporate leaders have ignored the ecological effects of factory farming, carbon emissions and the exploitation of our natural resources. If I were a young person, I would certainly hold older generations responsible. However what is sorely missing from the writer’s diatribe is any constructive solutions.

Further, the writer is uninformed. For instance, saying that Medicare is free health care is a joke. Medicare is quite costly, and it is something that people contributed to for generations through the federal payroll tax. Many elderly people live in poverty, and begrudging them Medicare borders on cruel. The writer also states that Social Security payments are increasing by more than 8%. The last increase was 8% due to inflation. Social Security does not increase by 8% every year. And again, Social Security is not an entitlement program — it, too, is a program workers contribute to throughout their working years (and it’s available to young people with disabilities).

The writer brings up elderly politicians who cling to power, and there is truth in this. But rather than spewing venom toward older people, suggest solutions. Such as term limits and young people actually voting?

Finally, the writer suggests that the older generation “relinquish the wealth.” I’m not sure what this means. The elderly population as a whole is not a wealthy group. Nonetheless, does the writer think that at a certain age, people should turn over their money to younger people? Does he believe that corporate America does not have the right to distribute profits to shareholders? (Many of these shareholders are young people working and contributing to IRAs.)

I hope he turns his anger to positive action for the environment and gives up his campaign to take Medicare, Social Security and bank accounts from Grandma and Grandpa.

— Clare Connor, Chicago

Getting a seat at the table

The headline story of Saturday’s edition is about the 81-year-old Rev. Jesse Jackson moving into the next phase of his productive life to tackle social justice issues that will benefit from his expertise and attention (“‘An architect of the soul of Chicago’”). Then I read the letter from a young man who feels older people should give it up and let a younger generation take over.

How about working hard, developing expertise and making your way on your own? Younger, productive adults are welcome to a seat at the decision-making table, but those who need others to step a side in order to be successful? Not so much.

— Sandy Pernick, Wilmette

Young people’s potential

I read Ethan Feingold’s letter regarding letting younger leaders take charge. I totally agree with everything he wrote, and I am 71.

I feel people such as Feingold, as well as Victor Shi, a young man whose op-eds I have also read in the Chicago Tribune, could institute changes relative to economic and ecological justice.

Chicago Tribune Opinion

Weekdays

Read the latest editorials and commentary curated by the Tribune Opinion team.

— Fran Anderson, Bloomington

Futile to resist change

Regarding the editorial “Profit-sharing and AI protection are answers to Hollywood strike” (July 16): Although I understand those working in entertainment want to protect their jobs and their income from the coming wave of artificial intelligence, AI is just another step in an industry’s evolution and is not going away.

We’ve seen change come in many forms. Newsprint is no longer set by hand in lead type, we pump our own gas, we self-check our groceries and computer chips run our world. Some jobs are lost while others are created; people will still be needed to use AI output in reasonable and productive ways.

The Tribune Editorial Board should not be at the forefront of resisting change.

— Edward M. Samson, Northbrook

Join the conversation in our Letters to the Editor Facebook group.

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.