Capitalism, Greed .... and Carlos Boozer

Meanstreak · Jul 8, 2004

This is a perfect illustration of my problem with the Capitalist ethos ...

Phaedrus, you keep trying to tell me that capitalism is not a greedy, me first ideology - but I just cannot believe it.

Boozer and all greedy feckers like him MAKE ME WANNA PUKE.

Here is a guy that was kindly let out of his contract that would have payed him a mere pittance (it's all relative I guess) of $760 000 - with the intention of getting re-signed at a mid-level exception (approx $ 4 million/year) ... after the magnanimy of the owner he turns around and sign an offer sheet with the Jazz for something like 10 million a year.

What the feck !!! One can't get by on 2 million a year (after taxes) ??? GREED GREED GREED.

I know, Phaedrus will deny this as a meritless indictment of capitalism, however, I suggest it speaks to the total inhuman (lack of loyalty and respect for the owner) aspect to capitalism. This is what I meant by the DISTORTION of HUMANITY which exchange value based economic organization contributes to.

Peace.

UncleMoneybags · Jul 9, 2004

I'm not an attorney but there should be a way to renegotiate his contract without putting themselves at risk.

He did screw them

but I can't say that I blame him, though because his career isn't like the standard 9-5 because you're just 1 serious injury away from losing your ability to earn as an athlete.

I know if I got a better job offer I would weigh all the options and if I chose to take it, it wouldn't be all about the money for me as it would be for the greater financial security that I might be able to afford the people whom I support. The owner may be the greatest person alive but I'd be remiss if I didn't do what I could to better myself and my loved ones. I'm not saying that this is what he's thinking but merely offering an alternative POV.

Phaedrus · Jul 9, 2004

Money is a secondary consideration to capilistic theory. Study it and you would know this.

Some guy sidestepping one contract to get paid more by another, great for him but wtf does that have to do with anything? Capitalism is a system of voluntary interaction, some of which involves money.

But okay, say this is purely a capitalist thing. What is wrong with Boozer getting paid $ 10 million? Why would he accept a contract for $ 4 million if another for the same job was available for $ 10 million?

You're telling me that because you are so disgusted by capitalism, if tomorrow morning your phone rang and it was somebody offering you a job doing whatever it is you do now for 1,315% of what you are currently earning and 250% of what you could be earning if you renew your contract at your existing employer, you would not find this a tempting offer?

Hard to believe.

Phaedrus

Meanstreak · Jul 9, 2004

With all due respect, P, I think you missed my point. This guy was let out of a legal obligation , voluntarily by the owner of the club. This was done in recognition of the fact that Boozer was due a little respect in the form of a 'wage' increase of over 800%.

How about a little perspective here ... the guy would have cleared over $2 million under the mid-level exception he would have been signed to - it would take me over 20 years to GROSS what this little fecker would make inless than 1 year - AND that is not enuff to show a little loyalty to the guy that made it possible ?

I know you will just chalk this up to more "class envy", BUT SERIOUSLY - when is enoughh, ENOUGH ?

Peace.

Phaedrus · Jul 9, 2004

I don't think it's "class envy." I just don't really understand the problem.

The guy is a professional athlete -- he has a limited shelf life. Maybe I'm cynical but I think that relatively few people go into pro sports for the love of the game. Utah made a major offer, one which I would say was unexpected by everyone, including Boozer, based on his comments here. The Cavaliers have a chance to counter the offer. If they don't, he'll probably take the higher-paying job.

I think the numbers may make the whole thing seem surreal, but seriously, bring it down to the level of the real world. People leave jobs for similar but better-paying jobs every day; I imagine that few of them find themselves accused of being greedy pigs. People also leave high-paying jobs for hobbies, pursuing dreams, starting families, jobs that pay less but that they find more personally fulfilling, etc. It's just something people do. I don't really get the drama, but above all I don't get how it becomes an indictment on capitalism that pro sports is little more than a media arm these days, one which is practically driven by materialism and sensationalism.

Phaedrus

ChuckSims · Jul 9, 2004

Meanstreak, It was the Cavs who tried to pull a fast one on Boozer. The Cavs knew that if they exercised the option on Boozer for this year he would be set to hit the motherload next year. So the Cavs get cute and offer Boozer half of what he would command next year if he agreed to sign with the Cavs IF they did not pick up his option. Boozer agreed but if the Cavs were that stupid AND greedy they deserve to get burned.

bblight · Jul 9, 2004

I don't believe what I'm reading here.
Basketball is a business! Plain and simple! If the basketball team saw it to be in their best interests to dump the player, he'd be gone in a second. Yet he does the same thing and he's accused of greed.

I'd be just as greedy in his shoes - when you're in a sellers market, you'd be a fool not to take advantage of the best offer - because it won't be very long before they're not interested in what you have to sell.

Take it while the taking is good.

Marco · Jul 9, 2004

Somewhere this bidding for players thing got way outta control...wouldn't surprise me to see in a few years down the road atletes making double what some of these insanely high amounts are....

I guess what pisses me off the most is when someone like, for example, Emmitt Smith sits out because his 30 some odd million dollar contract wasn't enough...at the time he held out his offensive line was blocking holes open that anyone on this forum could have jogged through.....had it been me making the decision on Emmitt I'd have set his ass on the bench and let someone else run through all those gaping holes....someone forgot to tell Emmitt that football was a team sport and the rest of the team deserves a share of the money, not just giving it all to one overpaid cocksucker. Yeah, I know, times have changed, and now almost everyone on the team gets paid more instead of just the key positions...

Among the other overpaid contestants besides the major team sports would rank pro golfers and those rednecks who drive in a circle and can't make a right turn....

Meanstreak · Jul 9, 2004

Hey Chuck,

Nice analysis. Okay, so I was a bit one sided in my attempt to portray GREED as the FUNDAMENTAL force behind the capitalist mind set. The question remains, however, HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH !?

As I said, it would take me the greater part of the time I have remaining on this planet to MAKE that kind of money, let alone spend it. These kind of people represent EVERYTHING that is wrong with modern civilisation. Nobody gives a flying feck about anything but themselves. Has anybody truly any concept of how much money a MILLION bucks is ? Never mind 10 MILLION / YEAR for x amount of years.

I was trying to illustrate the ETHOS behind this economic system. If it were not so pathetic it would be funny to hear about how "socially conscious" these multi-muti-millionaires are described as being when they donate a little cash to the public courts of their hometown. For jiminy cricket's sake they wear more money around their neck and ears than it would cost to fund an entire city's parks and rec budget for a year.

I'm trying to illustrate that unfettered capitilism = unfettered exploitation and greed.

Peace.

DarrylParsons · Jul 9, 2004

Top athletes make so much money because they have special abilities which entertain tens of millions of paying sports fans. Anyone who offers something that tens of millions of people will pay for will get rich. This all seems fair so I really don't see what the problem is.

Phaedrus · Jul 9, 2004

posted by Meanstreak:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
Okay, so I was a bit one sided in my attempt to portray GREED as the FUNDAMENTAL force behind the capitalist mind set. The question remains, however, HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH !?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, again, you're citing professional athletes' general propensity towards seeking high-dollar contracts as a flaw in the capitalist system, which just doesn't make any sense. You still haven't touched the question as to whether or not you would drop your current job in a heartbeat if someone else offered you 250% the salary to do the exact same thing.

"How much is enough?" Why do I have a sneaking suspicion this is not a question you would have asked the GM workers whose mid-90's strike was so severe that it actually effected the GDP of the entire country for the year (I think it was 1995 but not sure off the top of my head) when they were earning an average of $ 43.00 per hour in combined wage and benefits and were striking for more.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
As I said, it would take me the greater part of the time I have remaining on this planet to MAKE that kind of money, let alone spend it. These kind of people represent EVERYTHING that is wrong with modern civilisation. Nobody gives a flying feck about anything but themselves.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many rich people are very concerned about the problems of humanity, and many poor people couldn't give less of a shit if they tried.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
Has anybody truly any concept of how much money a MILLION bucks is ? Never mind 10 MILLION / YEAR for x amount of years.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's a lot, to be sure, but it is not one dime more than the job is worth, as calculated by the amount of money that basketball fans pour into the coffers of the NBA every year. You make it out like Boozer and other pro athletes are out robbing banks for a living -- they are playing their game for the amount of money that is apparently just exactly the right amount. Unlike governments, the NBA can't print money to pay its players. That money comes from somewhere, and the NBA isn't out robbing banks either. It comes from the millions of fans who line up to buy tickets, merchandise, cable tv packages, etc. completely of their own free will. And the great majority of those people are not out robbing banks to earn that money they spend -- they're working for it. So who the hell are you to tell millions of hard-working NBA fans how to spend their money? Do you castigate them for not caring enough about Cause X to donate what would otherwise be their NBA budget for the year to it? No, because they are just regular everyday folks like you and I. But for some reason once that wealth coalesces in the hands of Carlos Boozer, now it's a tragedy.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
I was trying to illustrate the ETHOS behind this economic system.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And ... you ... failed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
If it were not so pathetic it would be funny to hear about how "socially conscious" these multi-muti-millionaires are described as being when they donate a little cash to the public courts of their hometown. For jiminy cricket's sake they wear more money around their neck and ears than it would cost to fund an entire city's parks and rec budget for a year.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For Jiminy Cricket's sake, who the flaming fúck are you to judge on points another person's charity? If I give five dollars to a bum that's five dollars he didn't have before I gave it to him, and five dollars that I didn't have before I worked for it. And if he said, "Five dollars! Look at that watch you're wearing!" I would probably shoot him in the face and take my damned five dollars and go stick it in a G-string at the nearest titty bar, where it would be appreciated.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
I'm trying to illustrate that unfettered capitilism = unfettered exploitation and greed.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But it isn't.

Do you know how I came to become so critical of socialism? I doubt you care, but in case it ever comes up in a later Trivial Pursuit edition, in 1994 a dear friend gave me a copy of Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom (the book I recommended to you a couple of days ago.) While the book itself is a remarkably eloquent and persuasive damnation of socialism, Hayek was nothing if not several strata above my mental level, and I understood that the only way I was ever going to really grasp the points he was making was to find and read the assorted socialist works he cites and critiques and counters in ... Serfdom.

It took me three weeks to read Hayek's book, and over four years to read the referenced material. And then I felt like I was genuinely qualified to criticise intelligently the tenets of socialism.

Murray Rothbard once wrote that capitalism has a bad start, literally -- the word itself having been coined by Marx. And the greatest problem with capitalism is not anything to do with capitalism itself, but in the fact that the word is used as a general catch-all for virtually every ill the left sees (or imagines) in the world today. None of these people ever seem able to own up to the basic reality of the matter that capitalism is nothing at all except for a system of voluntary interaction between humans, generally expressed in terms of trade (but applicable to the entire specturm of human behaviour.) Why the hell everybody wants to lump it in with the seven deadly sins is completely beyond me.

Do yourself a favour (not me; I need no favours) and read The Road to Serfdom. It's 274 pages including the bibliogrpay and index and forwards and can be bought brand new for less than ten bucks in practically any bookstore. You might also bookmark this page, since it is an indispensible study guide to the Austrian economic school, which is the primary bastion of capitalist theory and study in the world today (I won't be quizzing you later, since I've been working on that site for several years and have hardly made a dent in what's there. But it will change your point of view -- I honestly believe that.)

Phaedrus

Meanstreak · Jul 9, 2004

Phaedrus,

Your tenacity in support of capitalism is admirable. You are obviously well read on this subject, and are almost convincing. So nearly convincing that I feel compelled to read your recommended titles. (I mean it this time, as it is evident you are going to be all over me like Charles Woodsen on a WR.)

I hereby pledge to stop my attacks on your beloved capitalist system until such time as I can refute, err - I mean - comment on, the subject matter contained within the publications you mentioned. (this may take a while as I have a couple of other books on the docket currently BUT my word is my bond and as soon as I get hold of a copy the education shall commence.)

Regarding the %250 wage increase offered to me. To be sure we are comparing the same things I give you this scenario :

I have just left the office of my benevolent, magnanimous, capitalist boss - who - after a heart to heart chat - has just seen fit to tear up my personal services contract and offer me a %250 wage increase in return for 4 more years of indentured slavery - I mean - employment. Upon my return home, I stop to buy the wife some flowers, and my child a copy of "The Road to Serfdom" - in celebration of my new found wealth. Along the way I bump into the owner of a competing firm. He notices the smile on my face and asks what gives. Upon learning that I am no longer under contract to my benfactor, his eyes light up and he offers me %200 on top of the %250 to come work for him. What do I do ?

Well, Phaedrus, as a father and role model to another human being - I can tell you, without reservation, that I keep my word to my original boss and politely tell the competitor to come speak with me in 4 years. Why, because you can not put a price on loyalty, good faith and trust. Call me what you want, but that is what I would do. (this was the scenario I originally painted, however, ChuckSims let me know that it was really the benevolent capitalist who was trying to get one over on me - so things may be a little different in another scenario.)

While I have your attention I would like to read some of your thoughts on such things as USURY and DEBT. The context I would place these concepts in are as follows - how does one justify the insane interest banks charge on loans compared to the interest they offer on savings - and is it even realistic to think that any country, state etc. will EVER get out of the DEBT they are in - and I have always wondered (as a taxpayer) how can we owe a DEBT to ourselves ?

Any response, at anytime would be greatly appreciated.

Peace.

P.S - On a more personal level. When I first joined this forum, your moniker 'Phaedrus' stood out among the crowd, and as a result I asked you a question "What do you ride ?" ... did I make a faulty assumption ?

Phaedrus · Jul 9, 2004

Just a quick note, and important point here, as I am being, um, summoned by Mrs. Phaedrus.

Your choice to remain exemplifies your values -- and this is the crux of capitalism, not money. The point is that you had the choice and you made the decision based on whatever factors were important to you. In the hypothetical situation above, you're glad for what you have and you want your employer to feel he has made the right choice, and so even given the temptation you choose to stay. The freedom to choose which interactions best suit your values is the essence of the capitalist process, which is nothing more than a system whereby people interact to their perceived mutual benefit. Money is incidental -- it is nothing more than a store of value. I don't work for money. I work for food and electric power and gasoline and flowers for Mrs. Phaedrus and that sort of thing. But my clients for the most part do not carry these things around with them, so they pay me in money, which is a representation of the things that I actually want and need. When I send the power company the payment, they are surely glad to receive it, but it is again not the money itself, but the store of value it represents. Money is nothing more than a tool to facilitate exchange. Do some people grow obsessed with material things (or even worse, just plain money itself?) Absolutely, all the time. Some that have it and want more, some that just want it, and some that have nothing but an endless lust for goods that will not improve their life at all but which they wastefully pursue anyway (not to be crude but basically the Cadillac in the projects syndrome. )

Anyway, time to shut up.

I do remember you asking that, and good call btw -- not everyody gets the reference. I have a 2002 Yamaha V-Star 1100 Custom, and a 1971 Triumph Bonneville. I've been kicking around the idea of getting something else but I am just too tight -- as is I have two bikes and just a single ass.

Phaedrus

Phaedrus · Jul 9, 2004

But if I did buy another one it would almost certainly be this monster:

The Triumph Rocket III, new for 2004. The largest production motorcycle engine in the world at just under 2,300cc (that's 140ci for you Harley fans.) over 140hp and over 140lb-ft of torque, Mama mia! that's a spicy meat-a-ball-a.

Phaedrus

DarrylParsons · Jul 10, 2004

Good discussion guys...

Phaedrus is 100% correct in his analysis while Meanstreak gets kudos for his reply which has good points and shows a lot of class.

MS is working on some internal issues and doing very well to get them sorted out. He is a highly intelligent individual who no doubt will get there with time.

Pheadrus is beyond that and already knows who he is and what he stands for on this earth (or so it seems).

I think MS' main problem is the huge difference between how society values things (like basketball skills) vs. how he himself values them. Such is the process of maturation and self-awareness. Highly intelligent people rarely share similar values with the masses. That in itself is not a problem but we have two jobs ahead of us as a result. The first is pinpointing and accepting these areas of difference, and the second is finding meaningful ways to represent our own values to have a maximum impact on the world around us. Luckily there is a lot of time at our disposal for that so there's no need to hurry or panic. The key is to move forward every day.

ChuckSims · Jul 10, 2004

Meanstreak, Its all about supply and demand. The sport owners are to blame for paying these salaries. Boozer is taking a beating in the press because he agreed to get shafted by the Cavs but then decided against it and signed an offer sheet from Utah. An offer that Clev can match and then Boozer would be forced to sign with Clev.

Phaedrus · Jul 10, 2004

posted by Chuck Sims:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
The sport owners are to blame for paying these salaries
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But wouldn't they be the focus of far greater criticism if they just kept the money for themselves? Then they'd be "exploiting the players," and not to be a dick but given that most of the NBA players are minorities, any possible scent of exploitation by the team owners would bring hell on earth to the owners pretty quickly.

I guess what I'm saying is that there's not really *anyone* who needs blaming. Maybe the media, for making a big deal out of jack shit nothing.

An aside-- I personally think that pro athletes' salaries, on the whole, are insanely high. I just don't think that "somebody oughta do somethin'" because as I said above, at the end of the day all that money is coming from people who want them to have it, as can be evidenced by all of the money flowing into the sport by fans.

Phaedrus

GAMEFACE · Jul 11, 2004

Phaedrus,

Very well said, you're on the money.

5teamparlay · May 10, 2007

GREAT SIGN by the JAZZ IMO

30 points in a nice win!!! Up 2-0 over the Warriors.

random1323 · May 10, 2007

i disagree, as a sports fan and an athlete, i understand that people want to see these sporting events, but why the outrageous prices for tickets, food, alcohol. greed. these players' skills aren't worth that much. their celebrity status because of their paycheck exploited by the heads so they also can have huge sums of money for doing hardly any work is what makes this a "game" of greed.