I've Solved the Deficit

[Hauldren Collider]

If people wanted sports, businesses would supply sports.

They would just increase ticket prices, decrease salaries/etc until they made a profit (or people didn't want sports anymore).

It is pretty obvious that the players (at least) could stand a lot higher taxation and still play. We had great players 30 years ago too, even though they were paid much less (and 50 years ago the same, and they were paid even less, relatively).

JM

At near 100% taxation who would be able to pull a profit on sports?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

If people wanted sports, businesses would supply sports.

They would just increase ticket prices, decrease salaries/etc until they made a profit (or people didn't want sports anymore).

It is pretty obvious that the players (at least) could stand a lot higher taxation and still play. We had great players 30 years ago too, even though they were paid much less (and 50 years ago the same, and they were paid even less, relatively).

JM

Isn't that where we are today, where professional athletes of star magnitude make more money off endorsements then from salary?

[Kuciwalker]

If you taxed a sport near 100% then businesses would invest in other forms of entertainment with less tax overhead.

Who wants to tax sports near 100%?

[Jon Miller]

Well, they don't pull much of a profit right now, so we will assume (that for whatever reason) their real 'profit level' is near where they are right now.

If you look at how much they pay their players and so on, they could probably (if all of them did it) have near 100% taxation.

JM

[KrazyHorse]

Taxing business profits is idiotic

He's talking about a payroll or revenue tax (pretty good substitutes)

[Jon Miller]

Taxing business profits is idiotic

He's talking about a payroll or revenue tax (pretty good substitutes)

Someone was talking about taxing business profits?

JM

[KrazyHorse]

If not, then your post makes even less sense

[Jon Miller]

OK, I don't know much about sports. And my understanding is that lots of franchises lose money. But lets assume they are profitable businesses (that even the ones that lose money give their owners profit in some fashion for the owner to consider it profitable).

So instead of looking at sports, lets look at tobacco. Isn't the tax on tobacco like 50% or more? High taxes are reasonable and work (with tobacco), but the company has to continue to make profit.

So then if taxes are raised to 100%, the sports companies would do some combination of raising ticket prices and fees/etc, and paying their employees less.

Then I pointed out that due to the high pay that many sports people received, that sports teams would still received talented sports stars even if they paid a lot less (they did 20, 30, and 50 years ago... in fact, talent and popularity are not directly correlated, NBA is more talented than when Jordan was around, but it is less popular).

JM

[giblets]

Well, tobacco taxes can easily be passed on to consumers because the consumers are addicted. Putting high taxes on sports would probably have a bigger effect on their ability to make a profit because people don't experience withdrawal symptoms if they stop buying merchandise and tickets to games.

[N35t0r]

or prostitution moebius strips! With 50% less sides!

[edit:]
Mental note: refresh the thread before replying when coming back from lunch.

[Al B. Sure!]

I still want to know how athletics is a positional good. I think there is a fundamental mis-understanding of how sports franchises and leagues work.

[giblets]

An athlete's job is to be better than the other athletes. Therefore an athlete's value is dependent on how good they are relative to the other athletes.

[KrazyHorse]

I still want to know how athletics is a positional good. I think there is a fundamental mis-understanding of how sports franchises and leagues work.

Good God, you're stupid

[Al B. Sure!]

An athlete's job is to be better than the other athletes. Therefore an athlete's value is dependent on how good they are relative to the other athletes.

No. The athlete's 'athletic quality' however nebulous that is only related, and tangentally at that, to the money coming from ticket sales, merchandising, etc.

His contract value is dictated by how much he is expected to contribute to a team's commercial success.

[Al B. Sure!]

I could say a stock trader's job is to be better than other traders. Therefore, a trader's value is dependent on how good they are relative to other traders.

No. A trader's value is based on the earnings he provides whatever firm he works for relative to the cost and earnings associated with other potential traders. Insofar as that, he is supposed to be 'better per dollar cost' than other traders but that doesn't mean that it's positional.