The Instigator
Pro (for)
8 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Star athletes are over paid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 683 times Debate No: 55656
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




Star atheletes especially those who play popular sports in a big league - most likely in the first world countries - are overpaid. They say atheletes dedicate a tons of their time and efforts, however in this copetitive world who deosn't do the same in order to be succeful in their life? There are millions of people who are starving in the thrid world countries where people might not even have a time to play any sports - not even own a tv to watch NFL and NBA games - and if they had time they will be working a full day just to make a dollar or so. Sure, athelets try their best, work hard, but even those who work for decent companies at managerial level do work hard and dedicate as much amount of time and effort. However thier salary will still remain at six figures. Do you really believe these people didn't try their hardest? They may have gone through tough schooling and stressful trainings in their own field. Only a very little part of the world benefits from sports and such entertainment. The others work hard but still live in poverty. Athletes don't have long career and it's true they retire early. But they make tons of money that some people might not even able to spend them all in their whole life. with a one million dollar in your pocket now, you can simply buy bonds and get interest payment. One million now may worth more then two million in the after ten years. Money lose it's value accross time due to inflation. Unless those star athletes gamble, party, or do other stupid things there is absolutely no logical sense that they can go backrupt. Worth mentioning athletes get base salary plus other bonus payment wich can double up the total compensation.


This is my first debate and I am not used to it so tell me if I do something wrong

1- First off all the athletes gain does not imply in the African children's lost, just because they gain all this money it doesn't mean that it would go for the children's otherwise, capitalism is not a zero sum game besides money and supplies are different things even if all the money of the world is gone the food is still there it's not like the athletes are eating all food on Africa

2- It's not just with the athletes, private banks and multinationals owners also gain a lot without doing much and just look at their sons they will be heirs of a many life's worth fortune without doing anything to deserve it at all

3- Its not that they are over paid it's just that others are down paid, just like in any other field of work the best fight among themselves but only the strongest one wins, the problem here is not that athletes should get less but everybody who battles hard should also gain more

4- They do deserve it, in capitalism the better gain more and the athletes are the best among the best of their countries to fight with the champions of other countries and they fight their whole life with peoples who did the same to get on this spot why should they be hindered from their so deserved glory

5- The price of something is decided by the demand so if the clubs pay for it he is worthy of this money just like a actor or a dj

6- When they spend this money and go bankrupt or go jail etc... like most of then do it will all come back to the system so it wasn't of much difference at all, oh actually it does because the money that would be used by clubs will be used to make stadiums and help tourism market etc.. so they are doing a good for humanity

7- They spend their lives doing something giving up on a friendly easy life for a life of exercises and pressure and as a reward they gain a life of glory, your whole argument is based on the vision that this somehow prejudice the starving children in Africa but it doesn't your argument in a shame by saying that you are spitting on the dreams of every single athlete in existence the hope of a glory in what make these starving children to play football and believe that they can use their talent to make up for their poverty and you spit in these dreams with your economic ignorance you really should study a little about economics and you will see that capitalism is not such a 7 headed beast

sorry if I was rude I am not used to English so I am not sure of how it sounded and sorry if I committed any error
Debate Round No. 1


I see your point but you are ignoring some basis of economics.

1. The basis of ecnomics is allocation of resources. Resources are very limitied that's why there is diffrent value for each currency. When one gains wealth it means the money comes from someone else's loss. This can be tracked from the very core of the working capital. Todays economy is tightly held by all nation through the international working capital. Africa is the place where most lucury resourses such as coffee, and cacao come from. Thus, you can't say the poverty in Africa is their problem. Indeed, it is the first world countries benefiting from them. Things that athletes promote such as nike, Jordan, come from those thrid world countries because of the low production cost. Those labors won't get paid even 1/100000000000000000000000 of what star athletes would make from getting into acontract with the particular brand or products. You see my point? Athletes in fact benefit from those labors from the third world countires. Just like everyone else living in the first world countries are partly guilty for this.

2. Financial market is one of the most competitive career fields. Investment is not something that you can do during your shift of the day. It takes long time, costs, and lots of analysis. If this was so easy then there is no rational reason behind those smarties all trying to merge themselves in the Wall street. Investment related business provide very tough working conditions. You need to be ready to work on a clock basis and most likely you will over work during the on-season. This is why people working in this section don't have long career life. Most of them get drained by their mid 30s and are serious about leaving their job. They do handle more professional skills and knowledge and it has to be very wide. For multinational businesses, they have to form corporation at each nation; this requires knownledge in international law and laws of both host/origin country. They have to understand the cultural differences in order to success in marketing, know the different capital structure, taxation system, government subsidiaries, and the inflation and exchange rates. For athletes all you have to do is train and play at their hardest on big games. They may have agents who handle the contract, team doctors who handle medical service, and even cooks who cook nice, nutrient meals for them.

3. Based on what are others less paid? There are considerably few star athletes than managers at the firms and divisions. Athlelets are minorities in population but they make considerably lot more money that the rest. Others are not less paid. Money is also a limited sourse. When someone holds more then someone else's gotta holds less. This implies money is being unfairly distrubuted. There are others work hard with good work ethics and appreciate every minutes of thie life but just can't afford anything to improce the quality of their life while many star athletes do drug, party, paying prostitutes to please them. And they once in a while go out and take pictures with poor kids with so dearest manner that they say they deserve more money with the GMs in the off-camera scene. It is their way to justify their actions.

4. They deseve glory? Don't get me wrong but that is a set-up marketing. Those franchises only try to make the player the best because once the player rises as a star - some sort of king in that sports - they can benefit from the player by using the player's name and picture to promote their products. This is like some people believe Apple is so much better than PC. The chips are made by intel and much of the internal parts are from other companies which means they are basically the same in terms of processing mechanism. They both have their products made in China so the quality control doesn't seem to be very important to them. But what apple does is throw tons of money in marketing trying to make people believe their products are superior. When people who are not very aware of their capital structure and manufacturing system, start believing that apple products are so much more to offer than PC, people will pay the premium to buy them. In fact apple products are mediocre just like the PCs or the benefits will be relatively smaller considering the premium. There is no glory of throwing the ball to entertain people, but it's the people believe that is so glorious. There are others who consider surviving is the glory.

5. Those franchises don't really care about the game their players play. They are all corporations that work in the best interest of maxmizing their own wealth. Thus it makes sense they pay their athletes because athletes indeed are their assets. Think of locking animals up at the zoo then feeding them so that people would pay the zoo keepers to watch those animals. High salary for athelets are franchises attempt to keep their assets in their business. And just like the bankers get their paychecks from the banks - as you believe they are overpaid as well - the athletes are getting theirs from their employers. And I do believe star actors and such are over paid as well.

6. When athelets go bankcrupt it's mainly becuase they party, do drugs and gambling. When money are spent on drugs and gambling the odds of those money flwoing back to the economy is highly unlikely. Why would dark businesses pay taxes and all that if their money is dirty. They do in fact launder them and keep them in stacks of cash. No money going back to banks -> insufficient funds for positive investments -> main cause of economic distress.

7. Everyone tries hard to success. Those wall street bankers, lawyers, doctors, and professors went through very stressful education and training. They gave up the same thing that athletes would have gave up in their life. But they don't get paid that much. Not even the best athletes get paid as much as star athletes. Star athletes are choosen based on what league they play in and how the public responds to that relevent market. Look at Yao the former NBA player. He sure had skills, physical, and good attitude. Do you believe he would be as famous and respected if he never merged himself in NBA, the bigger market where people - including myself - go nuts for throwing a ball in a basket (when I describe this to childeren from the third-world country, they probably give me a weird look as if saying "you are ovbisouly num nuts") Like I said not every people consider throwing, kicking, or striking a ball glorious. When hard time comes and you are facing a death, you would crap in your pants but feel no shame. When it comes to matter of surviving, medals, recongnition and such are no glory. I would rather credit those soldiers who fight risking their lives instead of star athletes. Soldiers don't get paid, no respect these days, their GFs and wives cheat while they are away, and thanks to budget cuts there are many lay-offs for them.

No offense but some of my words may sound extreme just a liitle.
Thanks for the response anyway.


from what i have seen you sound like a communist and this is not a bad thing the problem is that you are blaming the wrong person

look someone did indeed lost money and it was the great clubs and franchises paying the athlete but if they don't pay the athlete the money would NOT be used for any children in africa it would be used in something else for their own sake

now again you mistake food by money: "food is a resource" "not all resources are food"

and one more thing currency is not the real value of a thing even if someone pay much for food the food real value still the same

if you take the money from someone the food still there and yeah with our tech we could make food enough for everybody

but pay attention: "why are the kids working on africa?" "why are the kids starving on africa?"

its becase they are poor isnt it?

and soon you start thinkning that its captalism fault

and if everybody gave money it would solve everything right?


the reason they starve is because a bunch of POOR and LAZY peoples decide to have a BUNCH of sons that they CANT POSSIBLY feed

in fact their objective in having too many sons is exactly so that they can work for then

do you realize now this is one of that situations where trash father steal from their childrens

but in order to invalidate your whole claim just look at africa before the olympic games started and you will see thatit doesn't matter whenever athletes are gaining billion peoples in africa re still poor
Debate Round No. 2


I think your statement is getting irradical.

The fact they are poor is because the upper levels in the capital working map is taking all the benefits of the lower levels work and don't pay what they deserve.

If what athletes make from getting into a contract with Nike could be spent on the workers of their manufacturers it could do so much better for the rest of the world.

You are simply ignoring all the human rights as you are not one of the poorest people in the world. Just like you would go on and have fun with whatever you do poor people do have the same needs as you would.

So what people do when they have no money and nothing else to entertain them? They have sex and mostly likely they can't afford condoms. They also commit crimes because they know their life isn't getting any better - the reason why there are many rapists most of the time.

Food is also limited source. There are not enough food for every single people in the world. The only 1% in the world own car and 8% benefits from electricity. Tech is only available for the very few chosen people.

I doubt you don't know what communism is. Communism is a form of ideology that believes all the resources must be owned and taken care by the community. What I'm talking about is common welfare inside the whole capital map.

I'm not blaming the wrong person nor trying to connect star athletes with the poverty in Africa. My point is those sports are not the big of the matter in life when it comes to living. The entertainment is not the necessity in life. Those star athletes are just overpaid for what skills they have - it is not appealing enough for everyone. The best athletes are not getting paid as the star athletes. What franchises care is the looks and how interesting is the athlete not the skills the athlete has. Simply this is a set up marketing.

No one should have been paid that lot of money for just throwing a ball in the first place.

The biggest problem here is that those athletes weren't educated through their early life and when the big money comes in their pocket they get lost and spend money in all the stupid things. This is really a big draw back on the society as a whole. When they lose money on drug and gambling the money won't flow back for the sake of the community.

What's the difference btw all the celebrities saying they started from the bottom and now they don't even respect the poors - what they were used to be - and people from the first world arguing that poor people deserve all the poverty thing. That's just moronic and I define it greedy and shameful.


it seems that you are definitely a socialist and i won't argue why socialism doesn't work or why capitalism work this way i am just going to tell plain and simple this is a fact and any specialist will say the same

1- even if we got rid of the athletes it wouldn't get the kids any better if they stop working on fabric they will just die or fall for prostitution

2- the "upper levels" arent eating the food the food is stilll there and if peoples work they shoud be able to survive

3- whenever someone pays billion to another one to kick a ball is his option because its his money so he can do as he wish

4- you need to swallow your pride and start studying economics because this kind of utopic naive view won't take you anywhere

i won't reply any further because it's evident to me that this will end on a idealist battle just remember that:

1- peoples are not supposed to be good and if they were they wont and they aren't, so expecting people to be good is a foolish and irrational, if you read and watch about philosophy classics like Machiavelli you will understand that government stand for manipulation and the peoples aren't there for you good but for themselves

2- if any real progress happens in africa it wont be fruit of charity but a fruit of cold hearted management and captalism
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Everland 2 years ago
it's a shame but i am not used to english and economy is not my area but after hearing it many time it really understood that this kind of argument is childish
Posted by schachdame 2 years ago
Additional thoughts for the next time one is debating this topic: The educational background of most sports stars is very poor. There are basically no sport stars with college degrees; this is even bad compared to other economical sectors where particular education levels are not standard (like for film actors or musicians). Average sports stars are therefore rather poor role models and usually not as beneficial to society as other famous people.
Posted by Everland 2 years ago
will he ever answer?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Daltonian 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't use much punctuation or capitalization, and has a general disregard for grammar. Pro rightly shot down Con's assertions and explained his reasoning, whilst Con seemed to just ramble on.. yay, my first vote :]
Vote Placed by schachdame 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had problems maintaining a high level of conduct and that resulted in decreasing argument quality. Round two is the main turnover point to me. No sources have been used, although that would have been very beneficial for both side's arguments.