Get to know an NBA owner!

[NUMBERICA]

In fact, I would love it if owners came to the next negotiation and said "New plan: We'll give you 57%, but we want most multi-year deals to be mostly unguaranteed (team options, kind of like the NFL), a franchise tag, and a flex cap."

 

[idiot]

In fact, I would love it if owners came to the next negotiation and said "New plan: We'll give you 57%, but we want most multi-year deals to be mostly unguaranteed (team options, kind of like the NFL), a franchise tag, and a flex cap."

Do you think the players would even touch that? I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that they would.

 

[idiot]

I may be totally off base here, but it seems possible that one of the reasons the owners' proposals started so low on salary was to induce players to bend on system issues. The players would realize that if they wanted to retain salary then they'd have to compromise on the system. But the players seem to have no interest at all in seeing the system change, so we're stalemated.

 

[billyshelby]

If the majority of owners were making good money, they would have already caved. No business owner is going to sacrifice the profits of doing business for the losses of not doing business unless there aren't profits to doing business. That's why the owners have leverage.

No doubt the owners are looking to get over. They've got 2008 on their side, 2 CBA's that favored the players, and they want payback. The players need to stop looking for what is 'fair' with a microscope. They need to be practical. If everything goes right they'll be fighting over the riches in 7 years.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

GOP-ers/Tea-partiers/whoever those of you are that see nothing wrong with "taking advantage of legal loopholes":

How do you feel about teams using (see also: demanding) public money to build their stadiums on top of their need to pad their profit margins by skirting taxes to people with less money? All good? Let them do what they want?

The players that earn nearly all of the revenue for the teams and wanting (marginally) more than half of that are such slimy, greedy jerks.

I'll be sitting here waving my little american flag.

You honestly have a problem with a taxpayer taking advantage of a legal loophole? I think anybody who doesn't take advantage of every deduction available to them is an idiot. I applaud those who return extra money to society, but not through government where bureaucracy is out of control and waste is rampant. If you want to pay extra pick a good charity (and use it as a deduction, of course).

Extorting the local population to build an arena using government funds is an entirely different thing. One thing I respected about LHM was that he built his own arena. I'm sure he got some tax breaks for the project and I'm comfortable saying that they've paid for themselves many times over.

If you lived in SLC pre-Jazz you know what a massive risk LHM took. That risk changed this community for the better and I have no problem whatsoever that he and his family have experienced tremendous economic benefit as a result. Are there circumstances where someone gets rich through the exploitation of others? Yes. Is that the case for the vast majority of successful people in America? Absolutely not. So keep waving that little American flag of yours because it represents a wonderful country of unprecedented opportunity.

 

[GVC]

So keep waving that little American flag of yours because it represents a wonderful country of unprecedented opportunity.

Ya, not so much. Times are changing, friend. Most Western countries score better on the GINI index (an index of income inequality) and have a higher degree of social mobility (as per the London School of Economics 2005 report). One of these countries, Norway, also has higher GDP per capita (PPP, per CIA World Factbook), and several others are just behind (Switzerland, Canada, Sweden, etc.). The United States can't by a long shot claim to be THE land of opportunity anymore.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Ya, not so much. Times are changing, friend. Most Western countries score better on the GINI index (an index of income inequality) and have a higher degree of social mobility (as per the London School of Economics 2005 report). One of these countries, Norway, also has higher GDP per capita (PPP, per CIA World Factbook), and several others are just behind (Switzerland, Canada, Sweden, etc.). The United States can't by a long shot claim to be THE land of opportunity anymore.

Measuring economic opportunity by using income equality would be like taking your temperature with a tape measure. That said, I agree that there are changes that should be made in this country.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Canada is freakin' cold!

 

[GVC]

Measuring economic opportunity by using income equality would be like taking your temperature with a ruler. That said, I agree that there are changes that should be made in this country.

You realize I was looking at income equality AND social mobility AND GDP per capita, right? Norway beats the US in all three of those, and several other countries beat the US in two and are within 10% on the third.

And that's ignoring measures of life expectancy, health and happiness, which also tend to work against the United States.

It's more than a little disingenuous to state that the United States is a land of unprecedented opportunity. That's simply false.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

You realize I was looking at income equality AND social mobility AND GDP per capita, right? Norway beats the US in all three of those, and several other countries beat the US in two and are within 10% on the third.

And that's ignoring measures of life expectancy, health and happiness, which also tend to work against the United States.

It's more than a little disingenuous to state that the United States is a land of unprecedented opportunity. That's simply false.

Ahhh. So this is why everybody who wants to earn their big break is clamoring to get into Norway. Thanks for setting me straight.

 

[GVC]

It's nice to see you support your baseless assertions with absolutely nothing. Brilliant.

And, fwiw, the United States doesn't lead the world in net migration rate (although it is quite high). Once again, Canada (along with Australia, Italy and others) is ahead of the United States (Norway is much further down the list).

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

It's nice to see you support your baseless assertions with absolutely nothing. Brilliant.

And, fwiw, the United States doesn't lead the world in net migration rate (although it is quite high). Once again, Canada (along with Australia, Italy and others) is ahead of the United States (Norway is much further down the list).

Unlike you, I base my assertions on the actual behavior of people, but thanks for pointing out a bunch of studies that don't measure the issue that you believe I stated incorrectly.