MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Do basketball players make too much mone...

Do basketball players make too much money?


I have a prediction. Conservatives will either say no, or talk about how government pays for their stadiums and inflates their profits. Liberals will either say no, or talk about how they don't make enough because the coaches and team owners take more than their share.

Conservatives I understand, because they tend to support income inequality in principle based on supply and demand. Sometimes they recognize when the system is corrupt and are strongly against it because the system must be fair. But liberals I don't understand. Liberals are supposed to be against income inequality and yet I always get the impression from talking to liberals that they don't care about that at all and instead want to see both winners and losers, and it's usually arbitrary who they pick, based on all sorts of biases. They end up promoting even more income inequality by favoring certain groups.

I definitely think basketball players make too much money, way too much. A janitor works harder and makes $7 per hour instead of millions. I understand why this is, but think it's unfair that special people can be valued so much higher than regular people. Nature is cruel like that. As a proponent of the free market, I am automatically inclined to think about ways in which basketball players are artificially paid more money, for example as I mentioned above about government paying to build the stadiums for them. There are tons of issues for example only Nike is allowed to make a jersey with someone's name on it. Only ESPN is allowed to broadcast the game. High school players cannot sign contracts. The requirement to play man to man rather than zone, Etc... I suspect that the real free market wage for a basketball players is way lower, like low six figures, because people would simply not value NBA if there were more options, and people would simply not even value the sport as a whole if there were not so much money behind it.

I don't what options a liberal has to argue for this, other than to say everyone should make the same wage because everyone is equal, which is clearly not true. That explains to my why liberals would have a hard time with a simple question like this. In the past I have heard self proclaimed communists making arguments about how actors and artists deserve more money than factory workers because they are contributing to humanity rather than detracting from it. The question should be easy. All questions should be. Why is this difficult?

reply

I mentioned that liberal favoritism leads to even more inequality and I'd like to explain that more. One popular idea that I think is actually implimented in certain places is the idea of salary caps. Okay so basketball players can only make 1 million instead of 5 million. That doesn't solve the problem and in fact creates new ones. Now you just get weird trades between teams and lavish offices and locker rooms and other goofy stuff. It plays right into the scam of team owners taking more than their share! Well meaning and economically illiterate in the case of rank and file liberals, and feindish or even criminal on behalf of the media and academia who devise these schemes.

reply

No. Private businesses operating in a free market. They are paid what the market demands.

reply

The good ones don’t

reply

Like you said, the problems in professional sports and entertainments / showbiz in general is not the salary themselves, but in monopolies, be it NBA, FIFA or Hollywood and MPAA.

The free market is not that free. Some of the IP laws are ridiculously over protective. Yes, we need some protections otherwise we would end up like China with extreme amounts of knock-offs and fake brands. In the other hand over protections also as bad as mafia and creates extreme inequalities like sportman's salaries to janitor's.

If there is a janitor monopoly as strong as those organizations, with marketing, protections, and nepotism as professioal sports, janitor's wages would also be inflated (maybe not into millions, but still inflated compared than in a true free market.)

reply

Hmmm.. first you need to question your understanding of 'making' money.

You're thinking of it like in a house where the dad gives pocket money to the hardest working kid.
Our economy does not work like that. It's more about 'what do I get out of it?'

So Lebron James does not 'make' money.

- He trades a service (ie playing basketball or promoting a shoe brand or clothing line) for money.

- His team or a shoe brand gives him that money because they believe they will get more money selling tickets, merchandise apparel etc. How much money they trade for his service depends on how much they believe they will get back in return.

- Average Joe buys tickets, buys shoes, buys online subscriptions, buys the image of Lebron James because it makes them feel good (or they're manipulated into thinking he makes them feel good by the team/league through media - but that's another story). The more they buy, the more the team makes, and the more they can pay Lebron.





reply


Yes, in one sense, all professional athletes make too much money. But they only make what the market will bear in a capitalistic country. As you mentioned, it comes down to the law of supply and demand. And nobody is putting a gun to
the heads of the owners forcing them to pay them ridiculous salaries.

BTW, I'm a Conservative/Libertarian, so I guess I kind of busted your theory.


😎

reply

[deleted]

What does liberal/ non-liberal have to do with it, and everything? It's not about politics. I find this auto-reflex to be very simpleminded, sorry. Is it a way to sound intellectual, and topical ?

Why do normally intelligent (and not so intelligent) people think every single thing, person, movement, thought, place revolves a political party? ( If someone preferred ice-cream over pizza, it would inevitably be chalked up to something political and political-party) Anyone else feel the way I do?

May I ask if those who assume this to be in a certain age-range, or no?

reply

[deleted]

I was replying to Thrillhouse. Did you know?
..and regardless of who brought it up on which thread, my question still remains.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

ok, that happens

reply