toldailytopic: Do you believe professional athletes are overpaid?

[Servo]

Pay them what the market will bear. But it is a little perplexing that some are paid so much. I guess entertainment is pretty important in our society.
Doesn't bother me though.

Teachers on the other hand are not paid by that same principle. They are paid by me and others who are forever taxed just because they own a home on some property.

 

[DocJohnson]

So if you had the athletic ability and some team owner offered you millions per year, you would turn down that money as a matter of principle?

If he's the antithesis of Knight, he's dumb as a box of rocks. :chuckle:

 

[Ecumenicist]

This is a bigger question than it looks like on the surface.

If owners had their way, all the money would still be going straight to profits, and even the best players would still be making peanuts.

But, because of unions fighting for free agency and other concessions, backed by season killing strikes, players have a substantial share of the revenue now.

Players are getting money based on market demand, but the market is functioning for them only because of union intervention.

So the flip side of the question would be, should owners be getting everything that players get now? Are unions and revenue sharing such horrible socialist concepts if they enable competition rather than squashing it?

 

[GuySmiley]

I do. And I wont stop watching sports or drinking beer. And I assume we are talking about the multi-million dollar signing bonus type players. There are plenty of pro athletes who dont really make that much.

 

[NiteMayor]

They make so much because they bring in so much to the leagues and franchises. To make things better everything from tickets to parking to concessions ($7 for a hot dog is a bit steep) should cost way less to help reverse that tide.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

But, because of unions fighting for free agency and other concessions, backed by season killing strikes, players have a substantial share of the revenue now.

Players are getting money based on market demand, but the market is functioning for them only because of union intervention.

Oh my... you are so naive.

If the NFL had no union and decided to pay their players only minimum wage what do you suppose would happen?

Would the players be forced to play for minimum wage because there was no union to fight for them?? Of course not!!!

Instead, it would be a perfect opportunity for another league to swoop in and pay the players more money and grab all the best players. The NFL's decision to pay the players minimum wage would quickly force themselves out of business. If the new league didn't pay the payers a fair wage yet another league would snag them by paying even more. Eventually a fair market price would be established and the players would be paid a wage that fit their job description.

Let the market decide!

The only thing a union is good for now is forcing companies to have smaller work forces, leave the country and start a non-union shop there or shut down altogether. (and those things aren't good for American business)

I have been a part of two different unions and they are a very destructive force in the work place. Unions have caused the demise of the American automobile industry.

 

[lucy]

all the teachers have to do is elect democrats

Hey, I was a teacher for 16 years and worked long, hard hours and weekends to create good, stimulating lessons for those kids. The problem is, kids today don't want to work hard to get somewhere in life - they want everything handed to them. They watch actors on TV who have these dream jobs and think that is reality. Some look at the pro-football stars and think they don't need to learn about science, history, etc. because they will just play football and be a millionaire. I am definitely not a liberal either. Not all teachers agree with the national teacher's union - they are super liberal and do not have the kids best interest at heart.

And yes, I do think the pro-football and baseball etc. players are overpaid. True, they get injured and do deserve compensation for that; however, as a society we are placing so much value on sports, fame, and material stuff that our kids are getting the wrong idea.

 

[Cracked]

all the teachers have to do is elect democrats

Apparently, you've never taught. Come down to my world, I taught/administered 6 years at a private school for emotionally disturbed children. You're clueless.

 

[lucy]

Apparently, you've never taught. Come down to my world, I taught/administered 6 years at a private school for emotionally disturbed children. You're clueless.

Thanks, brother!

 

[Cracked]

Yes they make too much, however, they generate a lot of money too. Pro sports are a business like anything else.

 

[WandererInFog]

Let the market decide!

Sure. Eliminate all of their anti-trust exemptions, taxpayer subsidized stadiums and similar things which remove them from operating in the same marketplace as everyone in the economy, and I'd have no issue at all with the salary, however high or low, that professional athletes get paid. The problem right now is that professional sports operate in their own special bubble, insulated from a large number of market forces which makes it impossible to say whether the sorts of salaries they enjoy are caused by the market or by the extent to which they're protected from it.

 

[PlastikBuddha]

Yes.

 

[kmoney]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for December 3rd, 2009 10:47 AM

toldailytopic: Do you believe professional athletes are overpaid?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

To call someone "overpaid" sort of implies you have a dollar value in mind that you would pay the person. Labor isn't something you can really easily assign a value to like that. Labor is a commodity and income is determined by the market and what people are willing to pay for something. Professional sports generates a lot of income so the athletes can be paid a lot. That being said, there are other jobs that I think are more valuable than pro athletes. Like teachers, which was mentioned earlier. It would be nice if our society valued those types of jobs more, but even if they did I don't think we could ever see a income reversal. Or anything even close. Teaching just doesn't generate the overall revenues that sports does.

 

[Delmar]

toldailytopic: Do you believe professional athletes are overpaid?

What do I care?:idunno: Is paying them less going to put any money in my pocket?

 

[Ecumenicist]

Oh my... you are so naive.

If the NFL had no union and decided to pay their players only minimum wage what do you suppose would happen?

Would the players be forced to play for minimum wage because there was no union to fight for them?? Of course not!!!

Instead, it would be a perfect opportunity for another league to swoop in and pay the players more money and grab all the best players. The NFL's decision to pay the players minimum wage would quickly force themselves out of business. If the new league didn't pay the payers a fair wage yet another league would snag them by paying even more. Eventually a fair market price would be established and the players would be paid a wage that fit their job description.

Let the market decide!

The only thing a union is good for now is forcing companies to have smaller work forces, leave the country and start a non-union shop there or shut down altogether. (and those things aren't good for American business)

I have been a part of two different unions and they are a very destructive force in the work place. Unions have caused the demise of the American automobile industry.

Who's naive here? Remember the NFL takeover of the AFL? Yes, big rich companies do all kinds of fun things to avoid competition. They wouldn't pay minimum wage, they'd pay $100-$250K or whatever seems reasonable, but not a substantial portion of revenue as is the case now.

Utopian marketplace is as big a myth as is Utopian Socialism.

 

[Alate_One]

To call someone "overpaid" sort of implies you have a dollar value in mind that you would pay the person.

I think it should be related to the value that's given to society. But instead of rewarding teachers and scientists, we reward air-headed "musicians" and athletes. Of course if people stopped buying the records and going to the sports events . . . pay would drop off.

Teaching just doesn't generate the overall revenues that sports does.

But that's the thing teaching DOES generate revenue. Without teachers nobody would have any of the basic skills that allow them to make money. Its just indirect enough that people do not place as much value teaching. How did the athletes get to be good at the games they play? Someone had to teach them . . . .

Teaching is what allows human society to continue and to improve, without teachers, each generation would forget the lessons of the last.

 

[kmoney]

I think it should be related to the value that's given to society. But instead of rewarding teachers and scientists, we reward air-headed "musicians" and athletes. Of course if people stopped buying the records and going to the sports events . . . pay would drop off.

Yes it would. But if society did that, where do you think the money would go? I don't think it would end up in the pockets of teachers or scientists.

I agree with the sentiment that income should be related to the value you give to society, and in my post I said I wish we would give more value to people like teaches, but I don't see any practical way of doing that. If you have any ideas, I'm all ears.

But that's the thing teaching DOES generate revenue. Without teachers nobody would have any of the basic skills that allow them to make money. Its just indirect enough that people do not place as much value teaching. How did the athletes get to be good at the games they play? Someone had to teach them . . . .

Teaching is what allows human society to continue and to improve, without teachers, each generation would forget the lessons of the last.

Teaching generating revenue is very indirect. And that indirectness is why you will never see teachers with the incomes that professional athletes have. Again, even if we as a society suddenly began to praise teachers and give them as much attention as we do now with athletes and musicians, I don't see how the revenue streams would move to them as well. People don't pay to go see people teach.

 

[WizardofOz]

Not sure if anyone has made this point

Not sure if anyone has made this point

No they are not overpaid. The market rightly determines their income. The money is there regardless. Why should the owner(s) get to keep a majority percentage of the profit, rather than paying the players a closer to equal portion of the income?

The reason pro athletes get paid so much is because their respective franchises are bringing in huge profits from tickets sales, merchandising, etc.

It's more fair to give a large portion of this revenue back to the athletes we watch rather than allowing the guy in the owner's box to keep it all.

Thank the players unions for making it fair.

 

[Alate_One]

People don't pay to go see people teach.

Sure they do . . . college isn't free :chuckle:

 

[kmoney]

Sure they do . . . college isn't free :chuckle:

Yep. I have first-hand knowledge of that.