Now that MLB is back...does anyone care?

[todeen]

Will anyone watch if Trout opts out? Would he opt out for half the season? He has a baby due in August.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by todeen

Will anyone watch if Trout opts out? Would he opt out for half the season? He has a baby due in August.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I havent seen trout play in years and i watch at least 100 games year ..hes on the west coast and in the AL...

[packs]

I can’t believe there are so many people who fall into the owner’s narrative trap about the players being “millionaires who play a game”.

The owners are BILLIONAIRES who don’t want to pay people to work. How can anyone be on the side of people who by and large inherited their fortunes and never worked a day in their life.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

I can’t believe there are so many people who fall into the owner’s narrative trap about the players being “millionaires who play a game”.

The owners are BILLIONAIRES who don’t want to pay people to work. How can anyone be on the side of people who by and large inherited their fortunes and never worked a day in their life.

How do they not want to pay people to work? What player is working and not getting paid? They don't want to pay players not to play, actually....

It's not that I'm on the Billionaires side, it's that in the constant public money fighting between millionaires and billionaires, they all seem whiny and unappealing.

[packs]

The A’s are valued at over 2 billion dollars and as soon as the minor league season was cancelled they stopped paying the players $400 a week so they could save 1.3 million dollars. The owners only reversed course after the league made enough noise about it. Why should the players not want to get paid when all the owners want to do is screw them and make it look like the players are the bad guys?

The owners originally wanted to pay the players one third of their salary regardless of how many games they played.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

The A’s are valued at over 2 billion dollars and as soon as the minor league season was cancelled they stopped paying the players $400 a week so they could save 1.3 million dollars. The owners only reversed course after the league made enough noise about it. Why should the players not want to get paid when all the owners want to do is screw them and make it look like the players are the bad guys?

The owners originally wanted to pay the players one third of their salary regardless of how many games they played.

This is decidedly NOT "...who don’t want to pay people to work". They didn't pay some minor leaguers who didn't work. I stand by the facts in my statement, and my opinion of them. Again, I did not say anything positive about the owners, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[Chuck9788]

I just see it as a big tournament, (below) should be the World Series rings that they give out.

[packs]

Originally Posted by G1911

This is decidedly NOT "...who don’t want to pay people to work". They didn't pay some minor leaguers who didn't work. I stand by the facts in my statement, and my opinion of them. Again, I did not say anything positive about the owners, so I'm not sure what your point is.

It definitely is. Being a minor league player isn’t like having your job. When the industry shuts down they’re still expected to maintain a certain physical condition, train and follow all team rules in the meantime (rules that may limit your employment opportunities depending on what activities your contract allows). However the team didn’t want to offer any salary for that commitment or resources. The team can’t offer team facilities and they didn’t offer to pay for private instruction either. They expect you to do all the things you would have for no pay and at your own expense AND to find a way to make a living outside of baseball on top of it.

When it comes to the major league players, the owners wanted to pay a 54 game salary regardless of how many games were played. If the season was 100 games, they wanted to pay for 54. The players are only now getting paid a prorated salary for every game they do play because of the Union. Not because the owners wanted to pay people to work.

Please offer any counterpoint of your choosing that demonstrates the players are asking for things you wouldn’t ask for at your own job.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by packs

I can’t believe there are so many people who fall into the owner’s narrative trap about the players being “millionaires who play a game”.

The owners are BILLIONAIRES who don’t want to pay people to work. How can anyone be on the side of people who by and large inherited their fortunes and never worked a day in their life.

Not everyone buys into the class envy thing.

Now that you've finished running down people who have more than you (because they have more than you,) go out and buy a lottery ticket.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Not everyone buys into the class envy thing.



Now that you've finished running down people who have more than you (because they have more than you,) go out and buy a lottery ticket.

Stereotypes are always dangerous. There are some of the rich who are trust fund babies and living it up. Some worked really hard for their money. Some screwed others to make their riches. Others still are philanthropists.

But I think a stereotype that is true is that the rich stay rich by doing everything they can to keep their money. Some argue that's sound business operation. Others argue they're heartless.

Full disclosure: My wife and I are strong union supporters. I don't believe in socialism, but laws helping redistribute wealth are needed. The good ol days - 1950s and 60s - had a higher level of wealth located within the middle class, and also had higher taxes. Many want America to be more economically like then, but they aren't willing to recreate the conditions that allowed the US to flourish.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by todeen

But I think a stereotype that is true is that the rich stay rich by doing everything they can to keep their money.

I'm not rich but I save my money too. That's a bad thing?

Originally Posted by todeen

Full disclosure: My wife and I are strong union supporters. I don't believe in socialism, but laws helping redistribute wealth are needed.

I bolded the part where you advocate stealing from people simply because they have a lot.

If people build wealth by obeying laws, playing by the rules, then what they have belongs to them, and you and others need to learn to keep your greedy* hands off it.

*greed: Wanting to take what others have, because it's easier than earning it yourself.

[Cliff Bowman]

I don't know about MLB, but after what I just heard about the NBA I am through with it and if what I hear about what the NFL is planning pans out I will be through with it. I have been an avid fan of all three since the late 70's. packs, you can have them.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I'm not rich but I save my money too. That's a bad thing?







I bolded the part where you advocate stealing from people simply because they have a lot.



If people build wealth by obeying laws, playing by the rules, then what they have belongs to them, and you and others need to learn to keep your greedy* hands off it.



*greed: Wanting to take what others have, because it's easier than earning it yourself.

Redistribution doesn't mean theft. It can be a wide range of ideas. But let's call it theft for the sake of your argument.

How come individuals made more "real wealth" in the 1960s than they do now? My generation is supposed to be the first to make less money than their parents. I would argue that the wealthy for 60 years has redistributed wealth to the top percentage of earners. Therefore they have literally been stealing for a hell of a long time from just about 99% of the population. And if that has been you, tsk tsk.

Now, moving beyond "theft", redistribution can be something as easy as businesses paying a higher share of health insurance instead of passing it on to employees. That's not theft. Redistribution could be increasing taxes to reduce college costs. I wouldn't consider that stealing. States used to pay a lot more in higher education funding, so really that would be returning to previous levels of funding.

Do you want more examples?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[packs]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Not everyone buys into the class envy thing.

Now that you've finished running down people who have more than you (because they have more than you,) go out and buy a lottery ticket.

I don’t know what this comment means. If you think players are millionaires playing a game aren’t you denigrating people for having more than you?

[Hot Springs Bathers]

I didn't think I would care. I hate the rule changes, I don't respect the commissioner at all. However I'm looking forward to the games!