The new face of socialism

[Travis]

Vanguard of unfettered capitalism. Defenders of free enterprise. Enemy of the global socialist plotters. Behold the face of the opposition.

Under the watch of Obama a new cabal of socialism has reached new heights of popularity, influence and control of an awful lot of the means of certain production. In fact last year this unholy alliance took nearly $9 billion from the American people.

So what is there to fear from this organization?

Well, get this: the labor class has a very powerful union that has argued for medical coverage, a cushy pension and radical advancements in the physical protection for its members most of whom will retire after only working about ten years. The management of this "trust" is divided into thirty two divisions that are spread all over the USA. Each division brings in money, some bring in much more than others but they are required to split the revenue equally so that no one division will go out of business just because it had two or three bad years in a row. Oh and every year they welcome in a new wave of workers who are ruthlessly graded on performance but the worst performing divisions get to pick first! They actually reward failure! Karl Marx would so love this.

But don't just take my word for it. Listen to the head Communist Commissar of this organization brag about it.

That's right. This patently un-American entity is none other than the National Football League. I hope all red blooded, gun loving, beer swilling, gay beating, minority lynching, apple pie eating, true Americans are as outraged as I am. Especially since they love to pretend that this somehow works when all Conservatives know that no aspect of socialism has ever worked in any capacity. That's why we have no military or police. And certainly can never have health care for all unless we all want to wake up with Lenin in bed with us.

I trust you will all do what's best this November.......boycotting the National Football League of dirty un-American Socialists. I'd join you all but my team looks to be a favorite to win the SocialistSuperbowl.

 

[MG1962]

What makes your playful example even more ironic is the fact that most of these teams are owned by economic elite, who often draw funds from the proletariat to keep their divisions in their geographic locations

 

[Travis]

True. The tax payers of Minnesota just got pulled in to pay for a billion dollar stadium so their team wouldn't move to LA.

 

[MG1962]

True. The tax payers of Minnesota just got pulled in to pay for a billion dollar stadium so their team wouldn't move to LA.

Rumor has it the folks in LA offered to match the payment dollar for dollar to stop the Vikings moving to LA as well

 

[Travis]

Well they did pretty well with the other teams they stole.


I should point out that the NFL, with its socialist policies, is beating the crap out of MLB which has yet to institute a salary cap. Turns out fans kind of don't like watching two or three teams buy up all the talent. Also the NFL TV policy is far superior. Every team gets some national exposure. With MLB it is just all YankSox all the ******* time.

 

[keale]

What exactly is this MLB?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

While I want to rant about liberals making the word "socialism" friendly by removing any meaning from the word and implicitly accepting the conservative smear definition, it turns out there is more to the story:

Maher's routine was funny. It was also dead wrong. It's true that Major League Baseball, compared to the NFL, has an almost absurdly unstructured economy; so-called big-market teams such as the Yankees and Red Sox are in a different stratosphere than small-market franchises such as the Pirates and Royals because most of their income derives from not from national television contracts, but from local TV deals.

And Maher is correct, more or less, when he says, "The NFL takes all the wealth and puts it in a big commie pie and slices it up 32 ways, one for each team" because "they don't want anyone to fall too far behind." Actually, NFL owners could care less about who falls behind: they split their TV revenue in equal shares in order to keep teams from getting into bidding wars for players. Dividing up the major source of revenue into same-size slices of the commie pie is an effective way to hold down worker salaries.

Here, though, is the point: Though few seem to understand it, baseball's relatively unrestrained free market system produces fairer results than pro football's socialism. From the first Super Bowl in January, 1967, to February's clash between the Packers and Steelers, there have been 45 Super Bowls featuring 27 different teams, with 17 different teams winning the championship. The last 45 World Series have also featured 27 different teams, but with 20 different clubs going all the way.

If we take the comparison from the beginning of this century, baseball still comes out ahead. From 2001 through last year, both MLB and the NFL saw 14 different teams place in the 20 slots for their championship game. But football has had just seven different winners over those ten seasons, while baseball has had nine.

Linky.

The notion that a profit-driven legal cartel asserting control over its own millionaires is socialist is rather ludicrous. Local governments also subsidise stadiums in the vain hope of getting tax boons from their economic profit they can bring to the area. They just had a lockout.

By definition then, the NFL is a cartel.

A cartel, simply put is an arrangement among competitors to fix the cost of expenses and goods. It typically involves a small number of entrants and together the conspire to not act strictly in their own self-interest for the purpose of maximizing profit for the whole.

The NFL does not seek the economic good of everyone involved in the business of football. The reason they share profits is to create a better product that will allow them to collectively control the television market. They fiercely control labor costs in a way that is monopolistic, not socialistic.

The entire issue irritates me because it reduces complex economic concepts into meaningless slogans and tag lines. I will grant that many in the right deserve to have their noses tweaked. Too many people throw around the term 'socialism' ignorantly to refer to any government program they don't like. The solution, however, is not to continue to the perpetuate bad definitions and wrong headed notions about what the NFL is and how it operates.

Linky.

Only the willfully blind could deny that the NFL is a capitalist enterprise competing in a market economy with other sports and entertainment for spectators and television viewers. The goal behind the league's internal cooperation is to make games more competitive and exciting, to attract more fans, and above all, to make more money. Competing for advertisers selling Doritos and Dodge Ram trucks in a market with five hundred television channels is a strange example of the "most successful form of socialism in the United States."

...

Many economic entities that make up a free-market economy have internal constraints that could be labeled "socialist." Employees in a business corporation are expected to cooperate for the greater good of the collective. Businesses offer pensions and medical care like socialist governments, and many have unionized workforces. Families also impose values on their members of sharing wealth and obligation to the group.

Linky.

 

[Travis]

Of course it is ludicrous. But then so is the idea that Jon Stewart is a Socialist. Doesn't stop the Fox News chief from saying it.

 

[12AX7]

That's right. This patently un-American entity is none other than the National Football League. I hope all red blooded, gun loving, beer swilling, gay beating, minority lynching, apple pie eating, true Americans are as outraged as I am.

I'd add 'Bible-toting' and 'God-fearing'. See, here in the Bible belt, these same folks are always upset about NASCAR and the NFL working on the sabbath.

Oh wait...

 

[Beerina]

Of course it is ludicrous. But then so is the idea that Jon Stewart is a Socialist. Doesn't stop the Fox News chief from saying it.

In your link, he says that Jon says so himself. I don't get the issue.