Like many Americans, I have libertarian tendencies

[Mr. WEO]

That was my two cents, that's why I put it in parenthesis. All he did was talk about the NFL. That being said, there isn't a perfect system. By most standards however, the Scandinavian countries are the happiest, most crime-free, smoothest running countries in the world. Now, you could easily make the argument that they are smaller, less diverse and thus, easier to govern. But yes, to your point, every government in the world is Socialist to a certain extent

As you point out, Scandanavian countries for the most part don't have to deal with the issues of immigration that the US and western European countries face. It is an important factor, to say the least.

 

 

Hummmm, sound like you're picking and choosing. Europe in general has evolved with many programs this country has generally thought of as socialism, and to a lesser degree, so have we. Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, etc., are all in trouble fiscally, as are we. Yet Germany, seems strong and their individual tax rates are some of the highest in the world, so they do provide evidence individal taxation doesn't have to be low or extremely low to compete globally.

 

It should be noted that Bill Maher is easily far more intelligent than most around here, even though some of what he rants on about is a bit over the top.

The Germans are frugal, they pay cash and loathe personal debt. They are like no other Europeans. The culture in Greece, Portugal and Spain is for the gov't to care for all needs. The US "bailout" is expected to come from other Americans. There is no such expectation in Greece.

 

Maher is a very funny guy. He was great when roasting Bush and the Republicans during GW's two terms--fun to watch (although he was shooting fish in a barrel)! Yet he has no ability to focus his critical wit on liberals. He's become monotonous.

 

 

There are times I want to choke him but the guy is funny. He has a good head on his shoulders, a talent for pointing out the absurd and the chutzpah to tell us about it.

 

I think I read somewhere that the people of Denmark are consistently the happiest in the world. Lately, we seem to be the grouchiest.

 

Norway, Finland and Sweden all have higher suicide rates than the US. The Eastern European countries have the highest rates.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Mr. WEO

[bowery4]

Hummmm, sound like you're picking and choosing. Europe in general has evolved with many programs this country has generally thought of as socialism, and to a lesser degree, so have we. Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, etc., are all in trouble fiscally, as are we. Yet Germany, seems strong and their individual tax rates are some of the highest in the world, so they do provide evidence individal taxation doesn't have to be low or extremely low to compete globally.

 

It should be noted that Bill Maher is easily far more intelligent than most around here, even though some of what he rants on about is a bit over the top.

 

Just as an aside most countries conquered by the allies in ww2 had constitutions written with what Roosevelt was pushing as the 2nd bill of rights (he died before he could get it done here) but it was a part of nation building in our own governments opinion in many of the counties that are being talked about here. Hence the socialist agendas in many places, we put it there.

[Green Lightning]

Wow,trying to find some football in here. All the attempts at ideology being pure and applying it to the NFL is specious. The NFL evolved to what it is now and trying to fit the model into anything that makes sense in anyone's philosophy will end up with a thread like this one. Besides, if you look at what's happening in Greece, you'll soon realize the generational war has begun and the gorging boomers (me included in that age grouup) have financed the future of our kids to a point where they can't carry the load. So ultimately we will bankrupt the economic systems, whatever they may be, in our respective countries. At that point, football should be less expensive. So for the purpose of this thread, let's refrain from re-engineering the NFL via our personal views on individual and mass governance.

 

 

Let's just use democracy. I'll start. Do we like the draft? Yes. Do we like free agency? Yes. Do we tolerate bloated owners and greedy players? Yes, as long as they they play the damn game and stop with the lock-outs and strikes. Play football. I vote we play football and refrain from social re-engineering of the NFL.

[Hplarrm]

I think we all realize that the NFL is not a free market, chief. Vacuous? Holy s**t. How's the "NewNFL" coming along?

 

I am not sure we all realize it in that some folks continuously try to equate what is an example of how wprkers are treated in other jobs which operate in more of a free market system with how NFL players are treated in the non-free market system of the NFL where the players are not only partners with the owners but arguably the majority partners as they rake in a significant majority of the gross receipts.

 

If anyone should give up on an argument it is those who consistently bleat about that other more free market businesses where entry level workers receive something like the minimum wage sets the example that NFL players should only get an entry level salary. This shows little recognition of the fact that the NFL is not a free-market based business, it is a social compact based business.

 

It shows little recognition that in this country, we value highly individual rights and also competition. In our system, given the lack of the checks and balances providing individuals with other true options, the courts have protected individuals by ruling that if your social compact is going to set the rules, then you must negotiate with a recognized real union of the players. This is why the decert threat proved to be so potent. If the players decerted the NFLPA, then the NFL team owners were subject to a suit they would lose which would force them to operate in a free market manner.

 

I think folks blathering on about "name me another business" or pretending that the NFL worker-partners are the same as Ford or Wendy's workers is a pretty strong indication that the poster does not seem to be thinking based on the knowledge that the NFL is not Ford, is not Wendy's, is not a free-market based business. The players are flat out partners and arguably majority partners. The NFL operated a system in which they violated their agreement and the basis of how ownership of for profit business works in our system of maximizing profits for all the owners by instead taking less money for lock-out insurance from the networks. In essence this was the basis of the finding of Reagan appointed judge Doty. The appeals court reversed this finding even though doing so simply reversed the principle to render a decision for a few businessmen.

 

You are absolutely correct when you say above that the NFL is not a free-market. Given this knowledge then why would one want to make the claim that players in this non free-market is set by how workers are treated in a more free-market based system? They are not the same and the analogy falls apart.

 

Anyway, a contract is an agreement to terms by both signees. One or the other may be willfully be giving up what you consider "rights" in order to benefit from the employment agreed to in the contract. The NFLPA is the sole representative of the players and has their complete support, so you cannot argue that the NFLPA is "colluding" with the NFL against the players.

 

 

The contract specifically says that if the NFLPA decerts as the authorized representative of the players, then the players can choose if they want to use the check and balance of the courts to protect their rights as individuals. The courts have ruled that the players can and do give up their rights in a contract between the players and team owners known as he CBA. However, if the NFLPA is decertified as the players rep then the players rights as individuals does not simply go away. It now is subject o protection by the courts which will force the team owners to pursue a free-market type system as a protection of the individual.

 

It is this unwillingness of the team owners to actually compete in a free market and thus individual rights must be protected in an agreement like the CBA, which by agreement delivers a significant majority of the gross receipts to the partner-players which defines this situation.

Almost every job has an entry level pay scale that cannot be negotiated. You don't like it, don't sign the contract and then go try find a better deal in another line of work. It's a free country.

 

Almost every job comes from companies which are basically free market based. The NFL is not. Anyone who recognizes this would not be foolish enough to equate the salaries and method of operation that a worker in a free market based job gets with the salary and operations of what an NFL player-owner gets.

 

The Ford or Wendy's worker is not a partner in this free market based system in any way shape or form. The NFLPA was essentially recognized as a partner with the CBA forged after the first decert threat and arguably became a majority partner when Upshaw dictated that the revenues would be divided in the new CBA based on total gross receipts and not on designated receipts and that the player-partner take needed to start with a 6. The deal ended up being 60.5%.

 

The reality of the CBA real output was actually less, but still comfortably above a majority and the point was made. Our system so values the individual that either their rights needed to be protected in a negotiation between the team owners and the workers (ala Ford workers in a free market based system where individuals rights are protected by the competition between Ford, GM, etc).

 

Many jobs in this very country mandate where you will live. Obviously the military. Many police and fireman have rules that they must live in the city which employs them. Many private sector jobs transfer workers to other cities (without a choice, other than leaving the company).

 

I am sure that the NFL would love a cash stream where it could force money from the public by levying a tax as our military, police and firement are funded, but this ain't Cuba and it does not work this way in a free-market based system. You seriously are not equating how military salarys are set and NFL player-partner compensation is set. Maybe you do not seem to understand that the NFL is not free-market based because you seem to want to equate the salary and management of government employees with the salary and treatment of the player-partners.

 

 

 

You've got to stop this stuff.

I know I shoud give this up as folks seem to continue in trying to equate how workers are compensated and treated in free-marker based companies with how the player-partners in the NFL are compensated and treated. Use of this argument seems to be a flat-out indicator that the poster does not realize or simply ignores the fact that the NFL is not free market based.

 

In fact, the equating of the treatment of the player-partners with the treatment of government workers like the military seems to double down on this contradictory assertion. i just camnpt resist pointing out reality in this case.

[Hplarrm]

Wow,trying to find some football in here. All the attempts at ideology being pure and applying it to the NFL is specious. The NFL evolved to what it is now and trying to fit the model into anything that makes sense in anyone's philosophy will end up with a thread like this one. Besides, if you look at what's happening in Greece, you'll soon realize the generational war has begun and the gorging boomers (me included in that age grouup) have financed the future of our kids to a point where they can't carry the load. So ultimately we will bankrupt the economic systems, whatever they may be, in our respective countries. At that point, football should be less expensive. So for the purpose of this thread, let's refrain from re-engineering the NFL via our personal views on individual and mass governance.

 

 

Let's just use democracy. I'll start. Do we like the draft? Yes. Do we like free agency? Yes. Do we tolerate bloated owners and greedy players? Yes, as long as they they play the damn game and stop with the lock-outs and strikes. Play football. I vote we play football and refrain from social re-engineering of the NFL.

I agree that in general I prefer commentary about football rather than folks opinions in regard to Greece, Iceland, Germany or wherever.

 

However, the discussion of social compact based businesses versus free market based businesses is right on target and totally relevant to when we get our football back or not.

 

A big part of the problem in terms of the public's understanding of this issue and how the press covers it is based IMHO of a misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the NFL's business model.

 

My belief is that though the NFLPA is clearly a union and that unions are associated in folks minds with socialist approaches, that actually what is going on here is that the owners in fact have done everything they could to stay away from a free market model of operating, because there would be less profit for each owner if there were a freer market where they had to compete economically for individual players personal services rather than operate based on a social compact which is more like what most know as a cartel.

 

Government is involved in this big time. However, mostly its in the forms of the courts protecting individual rights and also trying to assure market competition as a check and balance mechanism to allow for preservation of individual rights.

 

It made perfect sense to me that the Reagan appointed Judge Doty found in favor of the players in his ruling as basically what was going on was that the owners were ignoring the individual rights of the NFLPA in taking less money for the cash to feed the CBA in order to get "insurance" the owners could use as leverage against the players in a lockout. Doty's ruling was classic conservative thinking in that he required the team owners to treat the player-partners like partners and not like mere employees.

 

The players in essence became partners after they threatened to decertify themselves as a recognized bargaining agent for the players after the team owners kicked their butts in the mid-80s labor dispute. Yes by decerting the NFLPA would cease to be able to negotiate the CBA with the team owners. However, just because the NFLPA went away as a certified negotiator, the rights of individual to operate fairly economically in our society did not simply go away.

 

In the absence of the NFLPA as a certified bargaining agent, the default protection for individual abilities and rights in our country is the check and balances provided by the free market. Decert proved to be such a potent tool because the team owners had to legally compete with each rather than collude in a free market system. Thus activities like the draft. In the draft, any chosen player is assigned to one and only one team to negotiate with and play for.

 

Its a very orderly way to allocate talent (and in fact Pete Rozelle led the way to setting up the draft in the ultimate socialist manner in that teams which fail get the first pick- a normal free market approach awards teams which do well by giving them the better players and thus creating a system which encourages one to do well). However, in our society it is simply wrong in almost all cases to restrict an individual to live in one place (without regard to his personal wishes) and only be able to negotiate with one team.

 

The courts do allow the NFL cartel to in fact place these draconian standards on the individual. They courts uphold the free market as the law of the land the NFL must adhere to unless they have negotiated a different deal with a certified agent chosen by the players. This agreement is called the CBA. Within it the players not only reversed the huge defeat they suffered in the mid-80s replacement player kerfluffle but they secured agreement to a deal within which NFLPA was able to dictate the terms when it was renewed.

 

MFLPA leadership (the group I call the talented tenth because

 

I agree that in general I prefer commentary about football rather than folks opinions in regard to Greece, Iceland, Germany or wherever.

 

However, the discussion of social compact based businesses versus free market based businesses is right on target and totally relevant to when we get our football back or not.

 

A big part of the problem in terms of the public's understanding of this issue and how the press covers it is based IMHO of a misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the NFL's business model.

 

My belief is that though the NFLPA is clearly a union and that unions are associated in folks minds with socialist approaches, that actually what is going on here is that the owners in fact have done everything they could to stay away from a free market model of operating, because there would be less profit for each owner if there were a freer market where they had to compete economically for individual players personal services rather than operate based on a social compact which is more like what most know as a cartel.

 

Government is involved in this big time. However, mostly its in the forms of the courts protecting individual rights and also trying to assure market competition as a check and balance mechanism to allow for preservation of individual rights.

 

It made perfect sense to me that the Reagan appointed Judge Doty found in favor of the players in his ruling as basically what was going on was that the owners were ignoring the individual rights of the NFLPA in taking less money for the cash to feed the CBA in order to get "insurance" the owners could use as leverage against the players in a lockout. Doty's ruling was classic conservative thinking in that he required the team owners to treat the player-partners like partners and not like mere employees.

 

The players in essence became partners after they threatened to decertify themselves as a recognized bargaining agent for the players after the team owners kicked their butts in the mid-80s labor dispute. Yes by decerting the NFLPA would cease to be able to negotiate the CBA with the team owners. However, just because the NFLPA went away as a certified negotiator, the rights of individual to operate fairly economically in our society did not simply go away.

 

In the absence of the NFLPA as a certified bargaining agent, the default protection for individual abilities and rights in our country is the check and balances provided by the free market. Decert proved to be such a potent tool because the team owners had to legally compete with each rather than collude in a free market system. Thus activities like the draft. In the draft, any chosen player is assigned to one and only one team to negotiate with and play for.

 

Its a very orderly way to allocate talent (and in fact Pete Rozelle led the way to setting up the draft in the ultimate socialist manner in that teams which fail get the first pick- a normal free market approach awards teams which do well by giving them the better players and thus creating a system which encourages one to do well). However, in our society it is simply wrong in almost all cases to restrict an individual to live in one place (without regard to his personal wishes) and only be able to negotiate with one team.

 

The courts do allow the NFL cartel to in fact place these draconian standards on the individual. They courts uphold the free market as the law of the land the NFL must adhere to unless they have negotiated a different deal with a certified agent chosen by the players. This agreement is called the CBA. Within it the players not only reversed the huge defeat they suffered in the mid-80s replacement player kerfluffle but they secured agreement to a deal within which NFLPA was able to dictate the terms when it was renewed.

 

MFLPA leadership (the group I call the talented tenth because

 

oops- sorry hit the wrong kwy..

 

because the vast majority of pro football players are drug addled goons. The talented tenth of player leaders however, understand all this stuff and were smart enough to hire a smart lawyer to lead them in negotiations this time.

 

I was engaging in wishful thinking that I hoped the players would add on to their two victories in the last two CBA negotiations by actually replacing the current NFL team owners as in reality the things they provided, capital and management could actually be provided from other sources and if done the 39.5% added cost could be eliminated and replaced.

 

However, it seems the NFLPA was actually quote satisfied to merely settle for 60.5% of the gross receipts and allow the team owners to manage the league for the most part.

 

The team owners are simply a drag on cost that my sense is could conceptually easily be replaced (it would be very hard practically because they would resist and after all they are old rich guys who though easily beaten in negotiations would be a pain in the tookus to simply replace.

 

However, a fan can dream can't they

[dollars 2 donuts]

There is no such thing as a free market "within the NFL". The free market is that players can decide to play for the UFL, or arena league, or even CFL, if they do not want to play for the NFL.

 

I'll agree that the other choices in the true market are not that great. And that the fans, and players could benefit from a real competitor.

 

But the NFL is it's own private entity. Once you are drafted into it, and decide to play in it, you follow it's employee rules.

 

The NFLPA is part of, and directly dependent on, the NFL. It does not exist without the NFL. I mean, NFL is right in it's name. It is not "The Football Players' Union of America". Therefore, it is in the NFLPA's best interest that the NFL succeeds at the end of the day.

 

It's not free market from team to team. It's from League to League.

 

If a player wants to play in another city, he can quit the NFL and play for that city's UFL team (if they had one).

 

If I want to change cities, I cant demand that my company transfer me to that city's branch. Unless there is a job opening posted, and I qualify to get that job based on the company's rules and hiring process. I can also quit and find a job with another company in that new city.

 

The NFL is NOT the USA. I think people get that confused sometimes.

 

Your first line was my exact first thought.

 

So I will hop on the Buffalo Barbarian band wagon in stating to you, Doc, that I could not have said it better myself.

 

Edited July 18, 2011 by dollars 2 donuts

[todd]

The market works. Nobody forced these guys to play football. It is their choice. Nobody is forcing them to participate in the NFL draft, it is their choice. They could take their free education and run! They could choose a career that is less restrictive to their personal liberties. Maybe golf? Basketball? Curling? Skeet? Dentistry? Real Estate? The opportunities are there to find a career that won't subject to to the whims of the evil NFL and the associated disgusting, immoral, union. And when the potential players realize how horrible the NFL is for their individual liberties, no players will want to play in the league and the NFL will crumble. See, the market works. It will weed out the abusive corporations.

 

 

and while it is impossible for me to feel much sympathy toward a college athlete about to sign a contract for more money than they have ever seen, it does bother me a bit when individuals are not allowed to sell their services to the highest bidder in a free market.

 

Thus, as the new CBA begins to take shape, one of the more troubling parts of it for me is the apparent abridgement of individual rights to participate in a free market which is going on in the NFL. The oddest thing about it is that the co-conspirators in this anti-American abridgement of individual abilities is not only the NFL (they are a corporation after all and due to the consistent taking advantage of the individual I have cone to expect bad behavior from them).

 

However, the NFLPA is joining toe to toe with the NFL in actions that flat out abridge the abilities of individuals to operate in a free market. These include:

 

1. The it seems to me outrageous agreement of the BFL and NFLPA to bar NFL teams from signing up adults who want to play the game. The NFLPA and the NFL have agreed to rules which not only ban the signing of minors to contracts (even with their parents approval (unlike other pro team sports and individual sports like golf or tennis allow even minors to sign contracts with their parents signed consent) but also bar adults from signing with individual teams until their age group reaches 21.

 

2. Even the draft itself abridges the ability of normal individuals to choose to live wherever they want to or can make a deal. Many folks falsely try to claim that an NFL worker is the same as a Ford motor company worker as they try to justify the NFL not letting their workers look at the books. This analogy not only falls apart in reality as the NFL worker and Ford worker simply operate under different economic systems, but actually the NFL worker has fewer rights that an auto worker takes for granted. An auto worker can choose to work in any city where he finds a job. If he worships the sun he can try to find a job in a plant in CA or if he likes having more than 2 seasons he can try to work in the midwest. However, an NFL player if he chooses to be an NFL athlete is assigned to negotiate with only one team without regard to where that player wants to live is irrelevant (whether he wants to live near his parents who are ill or always attend his games or he wants to live and raise his kids with a loved one near his hometown). Sure, NFL players get huge compensation to give up this right most Americans take for granted, but it amazes me that folks give up this principle so easily.

 

3. The worse thing about the draft is actually that it represents a huge taxpayer subsidy to the private business of the NFL. State run and taxpayer funded schools like football lineman mill U. Nebraska also are well compensated for their gleefully training student athletes for the NFL business at limited cost to the NFL (they do pay for the combine which allows them to abridge individual rights in an orderly manner) but this huge taxpayer subsidy to this private business is simply not the theory or principle we operate under as a country. Its no surprise to me that various travesties occur under this system which sees universities stand on their heads to in essence hire student athletes without paying them.

 

4. What also is outrageous is that traditionally the courts have been the protector of individual rights being ignored by the government or trampled on by corporations. The courts have correctly IMHO stood up for individual rights by only accepting the limited anti-trust protection the NFL enjoys if they negotiate in good faith with a representative of the players which is democratically elected. This is why the decertification threat by the NFLPA has proven to be so powerful. It is clear that with the union, that the courts (as reflected in the decisions by Reagan appointee Doty) stand by individuals to operate in a free market. In the face of this threat the NFL ran kicking and screaming to sign a CBA with the NFLPA which has now resulted in the players getting a majority of the total gross receipts of the NFL.

 

However, even if one accepts this system even if it goes against free market principles simply because it works to generate higher profits for both the players and the owners than if they used an actual free market (which was the ask of Brady et al. in their suit) it still does nothing to preserve the rights of young athletes.

 

These potential players have no representation and essentially no rights until they sign a contract. Its no wonder that that the NFLPA would agree to a rookie salary cap in exchange for more money for the vets and the retirement fund as young athletes are not represented at all in this "negotiation".

 

Overall, this fan is quite pleased to get this game back after it was held hostage in a fight between millionaires and billionaires. I am happy with any deal which the owners and players make to bring back the game!

 

However the principle still sticks in my craw that young athletes are having what most of us take for granted as rights to be stripped from them.

 

They are getting screwed in principle but at least they are well paid for bending over.

 

The NFL and the NFLPA deserve each other in their un-American actions to simply generate cash.

[DrDawkinstein]

Your first line was my exact first thought.

 

So I will hop on the Buffalo Barbarian band wagon in stating to you, Doc, that I could not have said it better myself.

 

 

Thanks bud, people (players mostly) act like playing in the NFL is a right, and that the NFL is some sort of Government agency. When the fact is, it's a private company and being hired by them is a privilege.

 

I started going to games during the last strike in 1987. I was 8 years old and way too young to comprehend what that meant. During the time I became conscious of Professional Football, the NFL had no competition for YEARS. I was too young to remember the USFL.

 

It wasnt until the XFL came along that the concept clicked in my head that "You mean someone could start another football league? The NFL isn't a governing entity?!?" I had never really considered it, and it blew my mind.

 

We get so caught up in the "big leagues" that have been around forever (NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA) that we start to act as if they are part of the USA. The fact is, theyre just a business that happens to have little or no competition (although that is slowly changing). When you step back and think of the NFL as a small company, like a business any of us could go work for, it changes things drastically.

[Hplarrm]

The market works. Nobody forced these guys to play football. It is their choice. Nobody is forcing them to participate in the NFL draft, it is their choice. They could take their free education and run! They could choose a career that is less restrictive to their personal liberties. Maybe golf? Basketball? Curling? Skeet? Dentistry? Real Estate? The opportunities are there to find a career that won't subject to to the whims of the evil NFL and the associated disgusting, immoral, union. And when the potential players realize how horrible the NFL is for their individual liberties, no players will want to play in the league and the NFL will crumble. See, the market works. It will weed out the abusive corporations.

In the American system, one's right to fair play with a business is not suspended merely because they make you a good financial offer.

 

Do you not agree with that approach?

 

In our system all businesses operate under a system of checks and balances. Normally market forces provide a reasonable check and a corporation which deals with the personnel who provide the service at a level below the industry norm for interaction and management of staff often loses staff to other businesses providing the same service.

 

However, back here in reality though the principle of checks and balances due to market forces is a great theory and principle, US law and systems which values the individual and personal freedom above centralized power be it a king, government, or corporations. In these cases we rely on the three branches of government a check and balance within itself to protect the individual.

 

It simply is not the American way for ones rights or abilities to be simply suspended or ignored because someone pays you a buck for it.

 

In this particular case, a couple of centuries labor law, codified by Congress, implemented by the Executive branch and checked by the courts when someone feels aggrieved enough to file suit have produced an economically successful system where a good product of football is produced and the NFL and NFLPA have reached agreement reflected in the CBA.

 

Under this system the claim that the NFLPA members have ceded all authority to the NFL corporation in exchange for the huge wealth NFL players get for playing a boys game is simply wrong in how things really work here in America and I am pleased to say would simply be a bad, unfair and not sustainable way to operate. The market provides some check and balance but the reality is that pro football skills are so specialized and there really is no rational similar alternative for the football athlete to simply go off an excel at another sport that the additional check and balance is needed. If the NFL chooses to simply opt of the CBA, then individuals (like Brady et al to seek redress in the courts. The court almost certainly if the NFL exercises there right to lock out the players , the players have the ability to seek court relief in forcing the NFK ti actually operate in a free market and is not allowed to dictate the terms of employment to the workers.

 

I for one am glad I live in Anerica which protects individual rights,

 

If folks are more comfortable with a centralized authority dictating things then feel free to head for Cuba where a centralized power dictates everything. Folks maje the mistake of not realizing that our government is not designed to be anti-socialist, it is designed to be pro individual.

 

I am glad the American way works the way it works and not the way you offer.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

I for one am glad I live in Anerica which protects individual rights.

I just knew there was a pony in there somewhere, and if I searched long enough I'd find it.

[todd]

Are you serious? Telling me to head to Cuba because I think our free market system in America works as is? Really? Suggesting I'm a socialist or communist, and therefore I should go go a country where the government even owns the fuggin restaurants?

 

I honestly think you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

And after your long winded post, you still forget to directly address the fact that people choose their careers, and can choose where they are employed or wish to be employed, and somehow get from economic theory to checks and balances in our 3 branches of government, which don't have anything to do with each other.

 

And this leads me to think you are a troll, and a damn good one at that. Good show, sir!

 

 

In the American system, one's right to fair play with a business is not suspended merely because they make you a good financial offer.

 

Do you not agree with that approach?

 

In our system all businesses operate under a system of checks and balances. Normally market forces provide a reasonable check and a corporation which deals with the personnel who provide the service at a level below the industry norm for interaction and management of staff often loses staff to other businesses providing the same service.

 

However, back here in reality though the principle of checks and balances due to market forces is a great theory and principle, US law and systems which values the individual and personal freedom above centralized power be it a king, government, or corporations. In these cases we rely on the three branches of government a check and balance within itself to protect the individual.

 

It simply is not the American way for ones rights or abilities to be simply suspended or ignored because someone pays you a buck for it.

 

In this particular case, a couple of centuries labor law, codified by Congress, implemented by the Executive branch and checked by the courts when someone feels aggrieved enough to file suit have produced an economically successful system where a good product of football is produced and the NFL and NFLPA have reached agreement reflected in the CBA.

 

Under this system the claim that the NFLPA members have ceded all authority to the NFL corporation in exchange for the huge wealth NFL players get for playing a boys game is simply wrong in how things really work here in America and I am pleased to say would simply be a bad, unfair and not sustainable way to operate. The market provides some check and balance but the reality is that pro football skills are so specialized and there really is no rational similar alternative for the football athlete to simply go off an excel at another sport that the additional check and balance is needed. If the NFL chooses to simply opt of the CBA, then individuals (like Brady et al to seek redress in the courts. The court almost certainly if the NFL exercises there right to lock out the players , the players have the ability to seek court relief in forcing the NFK ti actually operate in a free market and is not allowed to dictate the terms of employment to the workers.

 

I for one am glad I live in Anerica which protects individual rights,

 

If folks are more comfortable with a centralized authority dictating things then feel free to head for Cuba where a centralized power dictates everything. Folks maje the mistake of not realizing that our government is not designed to be anti-socialist, it is designed to be pro individual.

 

I am glad the American way works the way it works and not the way you offer.

[Hplarrm]

Are you serious? Telling me to head to Cuba because I think our free market system in America works as is? Really? Suggesting I'm a socialist or communist, and therefore I should go go a country where the government even owns the fuggin restaurants?

 

I honestly think you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

And after your long winded post, you still forget to directly address the fact that people choose their careers, and can choose where they are employed or wish to be employed, and somehow get from economic theory to checks and balances in our 3 branches of government, which don't have anything to do with each other.

 

And this leads me to think you are a troll, and a damn good one at that. Good show, sir!

Me, the other country stuff is actually peripheral as what leads my thinking on this is football. Do you really think that the NFL is a really based on a free market system? Even folks who definitely oppose my views generally like Mr. Weo was clear in his post up above that the NFL is simply not a free market system.

 

My assumption (perhaps incorrect because it is based upon your apparent adoration of the NFL method of operating with its player-partners)is that if you are consistent in liking the way the NFL operates then you must have some affection for centralized power economic systems over individual rights. This is what the team owners are trying to preserve or even want to return to with their lockout shenanigans.

 

If you really think that the fair way for the NFL to deal with the players is because they offer them some benefit which an individual player takes this then justifies them doing whatever as the player has already ceded any individual rights then you must love other centralized power economic approaches like a place like Cuba.

 

The two are obviously different things but they do share this in common. In both Cuba and in the NFL draft they can tell a person where to live without regard to his personal needs or desires. Perhaps you think this is OK in the NFL case because afterall, the player can go work at Ford if it bothers him to cede this right.

 

Fine, but that does not eliminate the fact that the individual is giving up such a basic thing we all take for granted. He better be well compensated if one values what he is giving up by entering the system.

 

I do not feel sorry at all for this millionaire who is being directed where to live by a billionaire. However, not feeling sorry for him is a lot different than endorsing or embracing this "choice" which you seem to gleefully do. Its your own judgment on this which makes me wonder whether you also like other examples of suspension of individual choice like a Cuba.

 

Its like the writer Noel Coward who once asked a socialite whether she would sleep with him for a million dollars (this was real money back in the day) she laughed and said of course. He then asked her to sleep with him for a dollar. She got all huffy, blanched and then asked him who did she think he was.

 

He replied we have already determined what you are, now we are just arguing over the price.

 

Do you really endorse the fact that NFL players "willfully" give up rights we hold to be basic and that this is OK because they chose to take the money?

 

I do not think that the ceding of abilities I think are basic in our society is simply OK depending upon the price paid for giving up this right.

[RealityCheck]

and while it is impossible for me to feel much sympathy toward a college athlete about to sign a contract for more money than they have ever seen, it does bother me a bit when individuals are not allowed to sell their services to the highest bidder in a free market.

 

Thus, as the new CBA begins to take shape, one of the more troubling parts of it for me is the apparent abridgement of individual rights to participate in a free market which is going on in the NFL. The oddest thing about it is that the co-conspirators in this anti-American abridgement of individual abilities is not only the NFL (they are a corporation after all and due to the consistent taking advantage of the individual I have cone to expect bad behavior from them).

 

However, the NFLPA is joining toe to toe with the NFL in actions that flat out abridge the abilities of individuals to operate in a free market. These include:

 

1. The it seems to me outrageous agreement of the BFL and NFLPA to bar NFL teams from signing up adults who want to play the game. The NFLPA and the NFL have agreed to rules which not only ban the signing of minors to contracts (even with their parents approval (unlike other pro team sports and individual sports like golf or tennis allow even minors to sign contracts with their parents signed consent) but also bar adults from signing with individual teams until their age group reaches 21.

 

2. Even the draft itself abridges the ability of normal individuals to choose to live wherever they want to or can make a deal. Many folks falsely try to claim that an NFL worker is the same as a Ford motor company worker as they try to justify the NFL not letting their workers look at the books. This analogy not only falls apart in reality as the NFL worker and Ford worker simply operate under different economic systems, but actually the NFL worker has fewer rights that an auto worker takes for granted. An auto worker can choose to work in any city where he finds a job. If he worships the sun he can try to find a job in a plant in CA or if he likes having more than 2 seasons he can try to work in the midwest. However, an NFL player if he chooses to be an NFL athlete is assigned to negotiate with only one team without regard to where that player wants to live is irrelevant (whether he wants to live near his parents who are ill or always attend his games or he wants to live and raise his kids with a loved one near his hometown). Sure, NFL players get huge compensation to give up this right most Americans take for granted, but it amazes me that folks give up this principle so easily.

 

3. The worse thing about the draft is actually that it represents a huge taxpayer subsidy to the private business of the NFL. State run and taxpayer funded schools like football lineman mill U. Nebraska also are well compensated for their gleefully training student athletes for the NFL business at limited cost to the NFL (they do pay for the combine which allows them to abridge individual rights in an orderly manner) but this huge taxpayer subsidy to this private business is simply not the theory or principle we operate under as a country. Its no surprise to me that various travesties occur under this system which sees universities stand on their heads to in essence hire student athletes without paying them.

 

4. What also is outrageous is that traditionally the courts have been the protector of individual rights being ignored by the government or trampled on by corporations. The courts have correctly IMHO stood up for individual rights by only accepting the limited anti-trust protection the NFL enjoys if they negotiate in good faith with a representative of the players which is democratically elected. This is why the decertification threat by the NFLPA has proven to be so powerful. It is clear that with the union, that the courts (as reflected in the decisions by Reagan appointee Doty) stand by individuals to operate in a free market. In the face of this threat the NFL ran kicking and screaming to sign a CBA with the NFLPA which has now resulted in the players getting a majority of the total gross receipts of the NFL.

 

However, even if one accepts this system even if it goes against free market principles simply because it works to generate higher profits for both the players and the owners than if they used an actual free market (which was the ask of Brady et al. in their suit) it still does nothing to preserve the rights of young athletes.

 

These potential players have no representation and essentially no rights until they sign a contract. Its no wonder that that the NFLPA would agree to a rookie salary cap in exchange for more money for the vets and the retirement fund as young athletes are not represented at all in this "negotiation".

 

Overall, this fan is quite pleased to get this game back after it was held hostage in a fight between millionaires and billionaires. I am happy with any deal which the owners and players make to bring back the game!

 

However the principle still sticks in my craw that young athletes are having what most of us take for granted as rights to be stripped from them.

 

They are getting screwed in principle but at least they are well paid for bending over.

 

The NFL and the NFLPA deserve each other in their un-American actions to simply generate cash.

Completely free markets are a utopian concept and do not exist in the real world, ever. There will always be rules and those that secretly usurp and manipulate such to their individual advantage while the majority of participants are unaware and/or ill equipped to rectify the resulting inequities. The 1999 deregulation of banks, brokerage firms, and insurance companies (Graham, Leach, Bliley Act) is a recent example of the masses being sold on a utopian concept that creates profits for very few people in the long run while making the majority of participants even more vulnerable in ways that they will never fully comprehend.

[todd]

I never said the NFL was based on a free market system. It most certainly is not. The American economy is a free market system. Nobody tells the players they need to play in the nfl. They are FREE to play in whatever league they want, including the CFL, Arena League, etc. Or they can choose not to play. That is a free market system. You can't treat an entity like the NFL as an economy and examine it as one because it ISN'T ONE! Since your base supposition is completely incorrect, so is your entire theory.

 

To be clear, the NFL can't be a free market system because it is a league. Just because you want to think it is to further your point doesn't make it so. Acting as an entity, the league (a corporation) has the right to make rules and govern the way it functions as long as it abides by the laws of the United States. It does this to COMPETE in the American market. For example, when the USFL was around, it competed with the NFL for players. In our free market economy, the NFL's system was better than the USFL's, so it won.

 

 

Me, the other country stuff is actually peripheral as what leads my thinking on this is football. Do you really think that the NFL is a really based on a free market system? Even folks who definitely oppose my views generally like Mr. Weo was clear in his post up above that the NFL is simply not a free market system.

 

My assumption (perhaps incorrect because it is based upon your apparent adoration of the NFL method of operating with its player-partners)is that if you are consistent in liking the way the NFL operates then you must have some affection for centralized power economic systems over individual rights. This is what the team owners are trying to preserve or even want to return to with their lockout shenanigans.

 

If you really think that the fair way for the NFL to deal with the players is because they offer them some benefit which an individual player takes this then justifies them doing whatever as the player has already ceded any individual rights then you must love other centralized power economic approaches like a place like Cuba.

 

The two are obviously different things but they do share this in common. In both Cuba and in the NFL draft they can tell a person where to live without regard to his personal needs or desires. Perhaps you think this is OK in the NFL case because afterall, the player can go work at Ford if it bothers him to cede this right.

 

Fine, but that does not eliminate the fact that the individual is giving up such a basic thing we all take for granted. He better be well compensated if one values what he is giving up by entering the system.

 

I do not feel sorry at all for this millionaire who is being directed where to live by a billionaire. However, not feeling sorry for him is a lot different than endorsing or embracing this "choice" which you seem to gleefully do. Its your own judgment on this which makes me wonder whether you also like other examples of suspension of individual choice like a Cuba.

 

Its like the writer Noel Coward who once asked a socialite whether she would sleep with him for a million dollars (this was real money back in the day) she laughed and said of course. He then asked her to sleep with him for a dollar. She got all huffy, blanched and then asked him who did she think he was.

 

He replied we have already determined what you are, now we are just arguing over the price.

 

Do you really endorse the fact that NFL players "willfully" give up rights we hold to be basic and that this is OK because they chose to take the money?

 

I do not think that the ceding of abilities I think are basic in our society is simply OK depending upon the price paid for giving up this right.

[RyanC883]

There is a free market. The NFL is a business. These players are free to take their services elsewhere if they do not like the rules in the NLF. That's how the free market works. Being a libertarian means that the government should leave you alone, not that you have the right to join an organization and then be free to do whatever you want within that organization.