- Sep 4, 2005
- 24,705
- 14,589
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
I felt this thread would be appropriate on SuperBowl Sunday
When there are threads on this forum pertaining to the wage gap and the unfair dichotomy in terms of salary, CEO's and wealthy business owners seem to be the main targets. I would think that professional atheletes would be bigger offenders than them.
If you take an owner of a company who makes $5 million a year and provides 300 jobs to people that pay $40k year, they get called out for being greedy and not giving themselves a smaller salary in order to give their employees a bigger one. However, you take a person who gets paid that same $5 million year to throw and catch a ball, and that doesn't seem to bother people as much.
I've heard several people that try to defend it by stating that the pro atheletes bring more business to the city and create more jobs, but the business it brings in is along the lines of hotels, restaurants, and bars (jobs that pay even less than the $40k jobs that the rich CEO is offering).
I saw it go down in Cleveland (the closest major city to where I live). They claimed that by investing money into Cavs & Browns, that would boost the city's revenue thus creating jobs. The only boosts we saw were to the salaries of the players and people involved in the sports organizations themselves. The unemployment rate and income levels of everyone else remained static.
Let's do some quick math:
NBA
Total Number of players: ~400
Median Salary: $2.4 million
MLB
Total Number of players: 750
Median Salary: $2.1 million
NFL
Total Number of players: 1,696
Median Salary: $1.4 million
$4,909,400,000 in yearly salaries that the players of the big 3 sports are making.
That's not including what other higher-ups in the sports organizations are making. That's also not including other sports like NASCAR, NHL, etc...
I would be willing to venture that the sports organizations above and the players are tying up more money than the CEO's on the Forbes 100 list.
According to another article...
So according to that report, the players alone make a bigger combined salary than the CEO's, and they're not in a hiring position and create almost no jobs (unless you count the supposed jobs that are created by a city having a good sports team, but as I mentioned above, those reports are a bit shady at best)
Sooooo,
If the true goal is to free up some money for the people who need it, shouldn't be be looking at pro sports before we look at CEO's?
When there are threads on this forum pertaining to the wage gap and the unfair dichotomy in terms of salary, CEO's and wealthy business owners seem to be the main targets. I would think that professional atheletes would be bigger offenders than them.
If you take an owner of a company who makes $5 million a year and provides 300 jobs to people that pay $40k year, they get called out for being greedy and not giving themselves a smaller salary in order to give their employees a bigger one. However, you take a person who gets paid that same $5 million year to throw and catch a ball, and that doesn't seem to bother people as much.
I've heard several people that try to defend it by stating that the pro atheletes bring more business to the city and create more jobs, but the business it brings in is along the lines of hotels, restaurants, and bars (jobs that pay even less than the $40k jobs that the rich CEO is offering).
I saw it go down in Cleveland (the closest major city to where I live). They claimed that by investing money into Cavs & Browns, that would boost the city's revenue thus creating jobs. The only boosts we saw were to the salaries of the players and people involved in the sports organizations themselves. The unemployment rate and income levels of everyone else remained static.
Let's do some quick math:
NBA
Total Number of players: ~400
Median Salary: $2.4 million
MLB
Total Number of players: 750
Median Salary: $2.1 million
NFL
Total Number of players: 1,696
Median Salary: $1.4 million
$4,909,400,000 in yearly salaries that the players of the big 3 sports are making.
That's not including what other higher-ups in the sports organizations are making. That's also not including other sports like NASCAR, NHL, etc...
I would be willing to venture that the sports organizations above and the players are tying up more money than the CEO's on the Forbes 100 list.
According to another article...
Overall, CEOs of the 299 companies in the AFL-CIO Executive PayWatch database received a combined total of $3.4 billion in pay in 2010
So according to that report, the players alone make a bigger combined salary than the CEO's, and they're not in a hiring position and create almost no jobs (unless you count the supposed jobs that are created by a city having a good sports team, but as I mentioned above, those reports are a bit shady at best)
Sooooo,
If the true goal is to free up some money for the people who need it, shouldn't be be looking at pro sports before we look at CEO's?