Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The NFL - Welfare Queens?


Delhommey

Recommended Posts

Adam Smith the author of The Wealth of Nations" (which modern capitalism is based on) insisted that capitalism without regulation would become unsustainable.

If you think nobody should have special consideration concerning taxes you should study about how many of your tax dollars go to subsidizing billion dollar corporations. In addition to the several tax loopholes that exist solely for the uber wealthy to maximize profits so they can give their executives insane bonus payments for failing to do their job.

Don't you think that money could be spent in better places?

The United States ranks 28 out of the 31 major nations concerning the upward mobility of the average citizen. The nations who are worse than us include Mexico and Turkey. This proves trickle down economics is a hideous failure.

Credit debt is the only illusion left to justify that americans are living in a grand society. When the debt catches up again (as it did recently) more banks will fail causing another collapse that we the tax payers will have to cover to prevent a massive depression. This situation will repeat itself until tax revenue can no longer support the banking industry which will result in a massive financial meltdown.

That's what deregulation gets you. Even the founding fathers realized that.

You can substitute deregulation for freedom if that makes it easier to grasp.

I am not an anarchist, so I am not in favor of no government.

 

I am not for subsidizing billion dollar corporations.

 

I believe the failures of the United States are caused mostly by government, not by the free enterprise system.  If you want to point to the problems we face today, those aren't a result of a failure of capitalism, but instead a failure of government.  You cant point to our current problems and say they are a result of capitalism because we have increasingly moved further and further away from the capitalistic ideas that made the US so successful in the first place.  I am in no way supportive of our current system, but that's because i believe that we are becoming too socialistic.

 

I actually think history is overwhelmingly on my side.  The nations that experience the most equality, freedom, and success are the ones who operate under a mostly free enterprise system.  Look at all of the communist or socialist countries.. Do you think those people are experiencing a high level of equality?  It is in those systems where you see the highest level of inequality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not an anarchist, so I am not in favor of no government.

I am not for subsidizing billion dollar corporations.

I believe the failures of the United States are caused mostly by government, not by the free enterprise system. If you want to point to the problems we face today, those aren't a result of a failure of capitalism, but instead a failure of government. You cant point to our current problems and say they are a result of capitalism because we have increasingly moved further and further away from the capitalistic ideas that made the US so successful in the first place. I am in no way supportive of our current system, but that's because i believe that we are becoming too socialistic.

I actually think history is overwhelmingly on my side. The nations that experience the most equality, freedom, and success are the ones who operate under a mostly free enterprise system. Look at all of the communist or socialist countries.. Do you think those people experiencing a high level of equality? It is in those systems where you see the highest level of inequality.

You a very misinformed, sir. Advocating economic regulation doesn't equate to socialism as for the majority of America's existence regulation has not only been present but it has been dominating. Eisenhower's New Deal lead to vast American prosperity and it was riddled with regulation.

Then came Reagen whose deregulation hurt the middle class and the lower class but it did not devestate them.

Then came Clinton who was a great President but with his support of NAFTA he helped to reduce the effect of the middle and lower classes further by allowing companies to move jobs to poor countries that worked for slave labor wages. This helped to cause the terrible inflation to minimum wage ratio we see today.

Then came GWB whose unprecedented deregulation formed the basis for the Enron disaster, the banking collapse, and the housing crisis.

I assure you I am not an anarchist. If I were why would I study our government as I do? Regulation is the exact opposite of anarchy.

Why would you resort to name calling in this discussion? Normally when people do that it means they have little of substance to say.

Please just research the facts I have presented to you using INDEPENDANT sources with no political agenda. You seem like a smart guy, don't let people tell you what to think, study and research until you reach your own conclusions.

Post script- I didn't say Capitalism was a failure merely that for it to succeed to it full potential it must be regulated appropriately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You a very misinformed, sir. Advocating economic regulation doesn't equate to socialism as for the majority of America's existence regulation has not only been present but it has been dominating. Eisenhower's New Deal lead to vast American prosperity and it was riddled with regulation.

Then came Reagen whose deregulation hurt the middle class and the lower class but it did not devestate them.

Then came Clinton who was great President but with his support of NAFTA he helped to reduce the effect of the middle and lower classes further by allowing companies to move jobs to poor countries that worked for slave labor wages. This helped to cause the terrible inflation to minimum wage ratio we see today.

Then came GWB whose unprecedented deregulation formed the basis for the Enron disaster, the banking collapse, and the housing crisis.

I assure you I am not an anarchist. If I were why would I study our government as I do? Regulation is the exact opposite of anarchy.

Why would you resort to name calling in this discussion? Normally when people do that it means they have little of substance to say.

Please just research the facts I have presented to you using INDEPENDANT sources with no political agenda. You seem like a smart guy, don't let people tell you what to think, study and research until you reach your own conclusions.

Post script- I didn't say Capitalism was a failure merely that for it to succeed to it full potential it must be regulated appropriately.

There was no name calling. I was talking about myself, not you. I was clarifying that I am not in favor of zero regulation, because I thought you were accusing me of having that point of view.. I don't believe in name calling either.

I also do a lot of research on the subject, and i think you are misinformed as well. What I have been telling you are the conclusions that I have made on my own. It is what makes the most sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dark Knight

10 seconds on Google got me this:

http://news.illinois.edu/news/04/1117stadiums.html

If you're really curious, look for yourself. It's about as controversial of a statement as "cigarettes cause cancer" and as difficult to prove.

This article also brings up the fact that the stadiums typically take up large swaths of prime real estate while receiving de facto rent subsidies, all while depressing surrounding wages.

Wooooo hooooo, NFL!

Yet you still spend your money & time supporting the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam Smith the author of The Wealth of Nations" (which modern capitalism is based on) insisted that capitalism without regulation would become unsustainable.

If you think nobody should have special consideration concerning taxes you should study about how many of your tax dollars go to subsidizing billion dollar corporations. In addition to the several tax loopholes that exist solely for the uber wealthy to maximize profits so they can give their executives insane bonus payments for failing to do their job.

Don't you think that money could be spent in better places?

The United States ranks 28 out of the 31 major nations concerning the upward mobility of the average citizen. The nations who are worse than us include Mexico and Turkey. This proves trickle down economics is a hideous failure.

Credit debt is the only illusion left to justify that americans are living in a grand society. When the debt catches up again (as it did recently) more banks will fail causing another collapse that we the tax payers will have to cover to prevent a massive depression. This situation will repeat itself until tax revenue can no longer support the banking industry which will result in a massive financial meltdown.

That's what deregulation gets you. Even the founding fathers realized that.

You can substitute deregulation for freedom if that makes it easier to grasp.

 

I'm not sure if i understand the last sentence correctly.  If I can substitute deregulation for freedom, doesn't a lot of deregulation mean a lot of freedom?  Don't we want a lot of freedom?

 

 

You a very misinformed, sir. Advocating economic regulation doesn't equate to socialism as for the majority of America's existence regulation has not only been present but it has been dominating. Eisenhower's New Deal lead to vast American prosperity and it was riddled with regulation.

Then came Reagen whose deregulation hurt the middle class and the lower class but it did not devestate them.

Then came Clinton who was a great President but with his support of NAFTA he helped to reduce the effect of the middle and lower classes further by allowing companies to move jobs to poor countries that worked for slave labor wages. This helped to cause the terrible inflation to minimum wage ratio we see today.

Then came GWB whose unprecedented deregulation formed the basis for the Enron disaster, the banking collapse, and the housing crisis.

I assure you I am not an anarchist. If I were why would I study our government as I do? Regulation is the exact opposite of anarchy.

Why would you resort to name calling in this discussion? Normally when people do that it means they have little of substance to say.

Please just research the facts I have presented to you using INDEPENDANT sources with no political agenda. You seem like a smart guy, don't let people tell you what to think, study and research until you reach your own conclusions.

Post script- I didn't say Capitalism was a failure merely that for it to succeed to it full potential it must be regulated appropriately.

This last sentence is exactly what our discussion is about.  What is "appropriate"?  I think this is where we differ because I want a lot less regulation, and it sounds to me like you want more of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd guesstimate 6-7 million with the proposed stadium improvements.

Without those improvements? 6-7 million.

 

So to close the loop on my original point, they were asking the state to contribute 62.5 million to aid with the cost of these renovations... so if the Panthers players and coaches are paying 7 million a year in state income taxes then that alone would reimburse the state for their investment in about 9 years.

 

That's not to mention the 62.5 million of their own money the Panthers were willing to invest in the project to match the request from the state. 

 

So all in all, the Panthers were asking the city and state to make a combined 150 million dollar investment to improve a product that results in 600 + million dollars of revenue for the city/state on a yearly basis (according to the USC study). 

 

If I had 150 million I would gladly make that investment on a 600 million dollar yearly return.

 

The deal also enabled JR to tether the team to the city by giving the city ownership in the actual stadium, since the escalators bays will be owned by the city. 

 

Now, if you want to talk about greed, focus on the Cowboys getting nearly 100% of the funds used to build Jerry world from the taxpayers. The Cowboys are one of the, if not the highest revenue producing teams according to Forbes but they needed 100% taxpayer money to build that stadium? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no name calling. I was talking about myself, not you. I was clarifying that I am not in favor of zero regulation, because I thought you were accusing me of having that point of view.. I don't believe in name calling either.

I also do a lot of research on the subject, and i think you are misinformed as well. What I have been telling you are the conclusions that I have made on my own. It is what makes the most sense to me.

So you are saying that financial regulations concerning antitrust and insider trading are harming our economy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no name calling. I was talking about myself, not you. I was clarifying that I am not in favor of zero regulation, because I thought you were accusing me of having that point of view.. I don't believe in name calling either.

I also do a lot of research on the subject, and i think you are misinformed as well. What I have been telling you are the conclusions that I have made on my own. It is what makes the most sense to me.

I appreciate your civil manner of discussion. Sorry I was mixed up about the name calling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this has become a hot tinderbox topic, let me add religion to the equation as well.  I read on here that come judgement day that folks will be judged by what they do and how they act.

Maybe I am wrong but the overwhelming view held by most denominations of christianity is that you are saved and go to heaven by faith alone.  So all this discussion about works doesn't fit with the guiding principle.

 

Just saying......................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if i understand the last sentence correctly. If I can substitute deregulation for freedom, doesn't a lot of deregulation mean a lot of freedom? Don't we want a lot of freedom?

This last sentence is exactly what our discussion is about. What is "appropriate"? I think this is where we differ because I want a lot less regulation, and it sounds to me like you want more of it.

I was refering to freedom from regulation.

You say you want as much freedom as you can possibly get but true freedom is the definition of anarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this has become a hot tinderbox topic, let me add religion to the equation as well. I read on here that come judgement day that folks will be judged by what they do and how they act.

Maybe I am wrong but the overwhelming view held by most denominations of christianity is that you are saved and go to heaven by faith alone. So all this discussion about works doesn't fit with the guiding principle.

Just saying......................

Most Protestant religions subscribe to this dogma. Catholocism is much different. There are passages in the KJ Bible that favor both. It just depends on what a particular church wants to proclaim.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...