View Single Post
12-01-2012, 06:38 PM
eco's bones
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,949
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
The obvious solution here would be some level of socialism, aka income redistribution. The problem with this solution is two-fold: 1) owners of major teams don't want to support the minor teams, they are better off in the long-term to buy them out of existence; 2) this, like all forms of socialism, does not encourage teams to be efficient.

Since there's no reason for a team to make more money, it will waste the money as much as possible. Why would Dolan give money to Wang when he can just pay more money to his own players, scouts, management, janitors, etc. Ultimately socialism will lead to everyone being equally poor, just as it does in all other economic spheres.

The real solution here seems to be a luxury tax. It still encourages teams to save to avoid taxation, but at the same time, if a team is only spending 24% of its revenue on salaries and wants to go up to 35%, nothing is stopping it from paying that luxury tax to Wang & Co.

But this would mean admitting that the cap was a mistake, which Bettman won't do. It also means owners would have to haggle with each other over the percentage of the tax, instead of fighting the players and keeping owner unity.
FWIW Revenue sharing is a form of socialism. Taking from one and giving to another or others. That the super capitalist owners don't object to the idea just shows that whatever puts cash in their pockets is okay by them. That they want guaranteed profits at the same time really goes against the grain of capitalism as well where a business wins or fails purely on the product it sells. An owner like Wang year in and year out puts out a shoddy product and why should he be guaranteed a profit or even Pittsburgh tanking several years in a row collecting Crosby, Malkin etc. isn't that enough? when in the meantime they're just as happy being a mediocrity.

The debate anyway between capitalism and socialism in this particular country misses something IMO as the capitalism of the greatest plutocrats makes them automatically outstanding citizens while in the meantime the socialism of Social Security, medicare/medicaid is a main reason why older citizens can retire and not work until they die or die on the street with no visible means at all. This country is balanced between capitalism on the one hand and socialism on the other and when looking at wealth disparity IMO there should be some limitations to wealth because it's gone in some cases beyond obscene. The Walton heirs for instance are billionaires many times over--the people that work for them in their stores don't do very well--even some full timers are collecting food stamps. There is something really wrong with that.

eco's bones is offline