Redistribution of wealth

Where is my yapping dog clip?

Society values what it does. Its neither right nor wrong, it just is. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Thank you, thank you, a thousand times thank you. You've just conceded that wealth, or lack thereof, is determined as much by the values of a particular society as it is by how smart or hard working someone is.

In other words, in a lot of ways, it's just dumb luck.

Again, i thank you for justifying my world view for me.

Oh please. Then why don't the Lacrosse Goalies pick football? Or baseball? Or basketball? Or hockey? Because there's a reason a 2 sport athlete, at least at the professional level, is extremely rare. And it's due to a whole lot more than time constraints.

Obviously you've never played sports. Originally Posted by Doove

You miss the point...

Like everything on here we generalize. I should have put a bunch of weasel words on this "usually" or "maybe" or "most of the time"

& I'll allow in your liberal prep school elite world, some of the better boys may play lacrosse (it is a demanding sport), but for the most part the best athletes find basketball, football, and to a lesser extent baseball in the US because that is where the money is

You miss the point... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Actually, i think what really occurred is you forgot just what your point was. Either that, or you changed your point to something that made a little (and only a little) more sense.

Like everything on here we generalize. I should have put a bunch of weasel words on this "usually" or "maybe" or "most of the time"

& I'll allow in your liberal prep school elite world, some of the better boys may play lacrosse (it is a demanding sport), but for the most part the best athletes find basketball, football, and to a lesser extent baseball in the US because that is where the money is

The best athletes have been finding football, baseball and basketball since long before being a pro athlete was the money making bonanza it is today.

But your point was (at least seemingly) that athletes can pick and choose which sports they want to be the best in the world at playing. Or at the very least, which sports they want to be world class caliber at playing. It doesn't work that way. Joe Montana didn't choose football over lacrosse because that's where the money was, he chose it for the same reason he chose it over baseball or basketball. Because football was the one sport he was best at playing. Very few athletes have an option. Your point, that i addressed, seemed to argue that they all had the option of choosing which sport they want to excel in at the level required to make a living from it. And the response to that is just a big fat "no".

Actually, i think what really occurred is you forgot just what your point was. Either that, or you changed your point to something that made a little (and only a little) more sense.

The best athletes have been finding football, baseball and basketball since long before being a pro athlete was the money making bonanza it is today.

But your point was (at least seemingly) that athletes can pick and choose which sports they want to be the best in the world at playing. Or at the very least, which sports they want to be world class caliber at playing. It doesn't work that way. Joe Montana didn't choose football over lacrosse because that's where the money was, he chose it for the same reason he chose it over baseball or basketball. Because football was the one sport he was best at playing. Very few athletes have an option. Your point, that i addressed, seemed to argue that they all had the option of choosing which sport they want to excel in at the level required to make a living from it. And the response to that is just a big fat "no". Originally Posted by Doove

disagree! (obviously you have never played sports, I could add, if I wanted to take a cheap shot) Many, many athletes have the ability to excel at multiple sports. They pick one an devote themselves to that. Are you saying there aren't, just as one example, a heck of a lot of NBA forwards that wouldn't be NFL TE's or WR's? Or vice versa.

Since there isn't a lot of $$$ in lacrosse, fewer exceptional athletes choose it.

disagree! (obviously you have never played sports, I could add, if I wanted to take a cheap shot) Many, many athletes have the ability to excel at multiple sports. Originally Posted by atlcomedy

So now you're going back to your original point? The point which you denied as being your point in your prior post? Ok, good.

They pick one an devote themselves to that. Are you saying there aren't, just as one example, a heck of a lot of NBA forwards that wouldn't be NFL TE's or WR's? Or vice versa.

That's exactly what i'm saying. Just how many Bo Jacksons or Deion Sanders do you think there are in the world? While there can and would be some exceptions to the rule, they would be few and far between.

Since there isn't a lot of $$$ in lacrosse, fewer exceptional athletes choose it.

But why do any exceptional athletes choose lacrosse, given your logic? I'll tell ya why. Because in 99.9% of the cases, it's the sport that they're the best at playing.

To the extent that kids "plan" for a career in professional athletics, their "plan" is likely to take into account which sport gives them the best opportunity. And the sport which gives them the best opportunity is the sport that they're the most accomplished at.

In regards to high school athletes who are offered Div-1A scholarships in more than one sport, to the number who would then get drafted in more than one sport, to the number who would succeed professionally in more than one sport, the numbers dwindle significantly every step of the way. To the point that by the time you got to the final step, succeeding at more than one sport professionally, your numbers are going to be pretty minimal.

I'll even take it a step further. I'd wager that if we took the NL and AL All-Star teams, and the NFC and AFC pro bowl squads, you would find at least 75% of the participants weren't even the most athletic kids in their high school class. Assuming Tom Brady or Peyton Manning could drive the lane or hit a curve ball is about the same as assuming they could play running back as well as they play QB. In other words, not a freakin' chance.

Thank you, thank you, a thousand times thank you. You've just conceded that wealth, or lack thereof, is determined as much by the values of a particular society as it is by how smart or hard working someone is.

In other words, in a lot of ways, it's just dumb luck.

Again, i thank you for justifying my world view for me. Originally Posted by Doove

What are you smoking? You better sign up for that logic course with Chucky. I neither said nor implied anything near that.

What are you smoking? You better sign up for that logic course with Chucky. Originally Posted by pjorourke

PJ, you seem riled.

I neither said nor implied anything near that.

Well, i said this:

But does capitalism display any true sense of rational values when a QB can make 500X what a teacher makes? I hardly think so. Supply and demand or not. Originally Posted by Doove

You followed up with this:

Society values what it does. Its neither right nor wrong, it just is. Originally Posted by pjorourke

And so, i said this:

You've just conceded that wealth, or lack thereof, is determined as much by the values of a particular society as it is by how smart or hard working someone is. Originally Posted by Doove

Back-track all you want, I think it flows pretty well. Just because you said something that doesn't fit your economic world view doesn't mean you didn't say it.

... Joe Montana didn't choose football over lacrosse because that's where the money was, he chose it for the same reason he chose it over baseball or basketball. Because football was the one sport he was best at playing. Very few athletes have an option... Originally Posted by Doove

Joe Montana chose football because that's where the money is at. He might not have realized it but its true.

Many high school kids still play multiple of the big three (four if you include track and field) sports. However, most are only offered ONE type athletic scholarship to a college. Very, very few Div 1-A football coaches will let their players also play on the basketball team (or the lacrosse team). So around their junior year of high school the physically talented kids struggling for scholarships start considering options. The talented male can't play lacrosse because there are only scholarships for FEMALE lacrosse players thanks to Title 9. Talented males athletes can get scholarships to college because there is money for those schools to make on football, basketball and baseball. Some high school players are drafted by MLB straight out of high school, many sign, because that's where the money is at. Many don't sign because they think they can make more money playing football eventually in the NFL.

I'm sure some kids who play various sports at a high level do so because they think 'that is where my heart is.' However I would challenge that if there was little financial future. That's why you don't see a lot of premium athletes playing lacrosse or cattle roping or foosball or motocross or soccer.

Thank you, thank you, a thousand times thank you. You've just conceded that wealth, or lack thereof, is determined as much by the values of a particular society as it is by how smart or hard working someone is. Originally Posted by Doove

Back-track all you want, I think it flows pretty well. Just because you said something that doesn't fit your economic world view doesn't mean you didn't say it. Originally Posted by Doove

Like I said, you need logic classes with Chucky.

Suppose for the sake of argument that society actually does value the skill of being able to play "Nearer My God To Thee" on a nose harp. Masses of people turn out to listen to this artistry and the few people taht are able to do it achieve great wealth. Now as I noted, this is a rare skill and the people who can do it have to practice very hard to reach this level of proficiency.

Now I don't know about you, but I would consider society valuing this skill as being highly irrational. But society values what it does, my opinion on rationality notwithstanding. And clearly, these people work hard to achieve their level of skill. So how does this set of facts imply that their wealth is determined by luck of society's' taste, not their hard work? Now if the only people that could play a nose harp was someone that had a really really big nose, then we would be looking at a combination of luck and hard work, but not luck alone.

I'm dying to be enlightened Doove.

Joe Montana chose football because that's where the money is at. He might not have realized it but its true. Originally Posted by gnadfly

It was "where the money is at" because it was the sport where he was good enough to make the money. Assuming he even left high school with a "plan" to make a career out of it. I'm sure he had a "hope" of making a career out of it, but i doubt it was his #1 plan until about his Junior year of college.

I find it impossible to believe that anyone can be so naive as to think that a ML shortstop or center-fielder or pitcher could be an NFL QB or running back, or left tackle, or an NBA point guard or power forward, if that's what he'd rather be. Or vice-versa.

I mean, come on already. Most pro athletes couldn't even make it in a different position in their own sport, yet we're supposed to believe they could make it in some position of a different sport?

Ever since Tiger made so much money, there have been a lot more talented athletes that have taken up golf. They are following the money.

Nobody said 23 year-old switch sports to optimize income, its done much earlier.

1) Only a small number of people can play "Nearer My God to Thee" on a nose harp, but that doesn't make it valuable. That is supply. There also has to be demand -- which there is in spades for high performing CEO's -- one of the reasons so many are replaced. Originally Posted by pjorourke

True but the problem is the inbreeding. A lot of the people on the CEO search committee but more importantly the compensation committees know or are basically paying each other. And those people know that the general stockholder or mutual fund manager isn't going to say anything about it unless the stock 'unjustifiably' tanks. Same thing with these interlocking Board of Directors serving across multiple large corporations.

Well Chuck, the only reason I can think of for banging your head against a brick wall is that it feels so good when you stop. You have your opinion, I have mine. Its obvious that what I've said so far isn't going to sway your opinion and I know you are wrong, thus you aren't changing mine, so why argue further? Originally Posted by pjorourke

Your avatar pr O ceeds you, most assuredly. i think being that closed minded and blunt... one ups my excentric tendancy... and even trumps my posts when I'm really fukin drunk.

THANKS. I needed that.

( an argument unsaid.. is an opportunity unlayed )

oh.. nevermind. that's not pertaining to today.. is it?

It was "where the money is at" because it was the sport where he was good enough to make the money. Assuming he even left high school with a "plan" to make a career out of it. I'm sure he had a "hope" of making a career out of it, but i doubt it was his #1 plan until about his Junior year of college.

I find it impossible to believe that anyone can be so naive as to think that a ML shortstop or center-fielder or pitcher could be an NFL QB or running back, or left tackle, or an NBA point guard or power forward, if that's what he'd rather be. Or vice-versa.

I mean, come on already. Most pro athletes couldn't even make it in a different position in their own sport, yet we're supposed to believe they could make it in some position of a different sport? Originally Posted by Doove

Most pro athletes made the commitment to their sport when they signed their college scholarship offer. Few Div 1 A coaches are going to let their players - especially their star (read pro quality) players play another sport. The scholarship is 'part' of 'the money' also.

From wiki:
Montana received his primary education at Waverly Elementary and his secondary education at Finleyville Junior High (Known as Finleyville Middle School) and Ringgold High School.[11] While at Ringgold, Montana played football, baseball, and basketball.[9] Montana showed potential as a basketball player and helped Ringgold win the 1973 WPIAL Class AAA boy's basketball championship while being named an all-state player.[12] He was so good that during his senior year, North Carolina State University (NCSU) offered Montana a basketball scholarship.[3] Although Montana turned down the scholarship, he seriously considered NCSU because of a promise that he could play both basketball and football for the university.