All CBA talk goes here (NHL offers 50/50 deal - 82 game deadline passed)
View Single Post
07-14-2012, 02:33 PM
Join Date: Aug 2005
Originally Posted by
This is ridiculous. Without the players, the owners wouldn't be making any money either.
How are players "ungrateful"? This is a mutual business relationship wherein both sides provide something in order to mutually profit. The owners are as indebted to the players as vice versa.
I wish you actually attempted to make more coherent points here because I find this attitude irritating enough to write a thousand words of rebuttal. It is amusing though that you think ownership sells jerseys rather than... players.
And I'm not someone who is inherently pro-union or anti-management when it comes to labor disputes as both sides are, and should be, inherently selfish and whoever wins out is typically the side that is making demands most in line with economic reality.
It should be noted, however, that professional sports teams have government-backed monopolies. This is different from regular market monopolies which I have no ideological issue with existing, though which are ironically illegal. The government, a singular source of authority and power, is responsible for the maintenance of most monopolies' legitimacy,
otherwise competition eventually wins out.
So to sit there and **** on within this framework about how the owners are heroes and the players should lick their boots for the opportunity to play for them is more than a bit of a joke.
Without derailing this thread too much, thats simply not true. Free market and fair competition are wonderful economic theories but don't exist that much in the real world outside of textbooks.
Last edited by joshjull: 07-14-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by joshjull