Politics Brittney Griner

[EL PRESIDENTE]

How is offering a legitimate minimum level of pay even in the same conversation as capping ceo pay?

I don't think ceo pay should necessarily be capped, but income over something like $1 million should be taxed at such high rates that it's not worth earning much more than that... And that should be tied to inflation.

For the WNBA, $128k a year is a legitimate minimum level of pay. They can also have the free time to go to European leagues or elsewhere and earn additional salaries.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

I just found out the WNBA season is 36 games.


It runs from May 6 – August 14

 

[Phatguysrule]

For the WNBA, $128k a year is a legitimate minimum level of pay. They can also have the free time to go to European leagues or elsewhere and earn additional salaries.

No that's a legitimate salary for a garbage man or auto mechanic. Not an elite athlete in the national spotlight.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

No that's a legitimate salary for a garbage man or auto mechanic. Not an elite athlete in the national spotlight.

That's for a 3 month season.

Elite athlete in a national spotlight? Lol, most people can't even name 5 current WNBA players or who won the previous championship.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I just found out the WNBA season is 36 games.


It runs from May 6 – August 14

So the average NBA player makes $100k per game.

I'm advocating we pay the average WNBA player $25k-$30k per game.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

So the average NBA player makes $100k per game.

I'm advocating we pay the average WNBA player $25k-$30k per game.

For a league who averages 2,600 attendees per game. Does the W in WNBA stand for Welfare?

 

[Phatguysrule]

That's for a 3 month season.

Elite athlete in a national spotlight? Lol, most people can't even name 5 current WNBA players or who won the previous championship.

There are about a million female basketball players in this country who can.

And I would bet most Americans couldn't name 5 current NBA players or remember who won the last championship...

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

There are about a million female basketball players in this country who can.

And I would bet most Americans couldn't name 5 current NBA players or remember who won the last championship...

You would be wrong.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You would be wrong.

I disagree. Most people in my house couldn't do that, and I watch the NBA all the time. And my kids play basketball.

Most people don't give 2 shits about the NBA.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

I disagree. Most people in my house couldn't do that, and I watch the NBA all the time. And my kids play basketball.

Most people don't give 2 shits about the NBA.

Well, if most people don't give 2 shits about the NBA, then most people give 0.0000000002 shits about the WNBA

 

[Phatguysrule]

For a league who averages 2,600 attendees per game. Does the W in WNBA stand for Welfare?

In a $15 billion industry, they are among the top 600 talents.

I don't think being paid 30% of what their male counterparts make for a performance is asking too much.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

In a $15 billion industry, they are among the top 600 talents.

I don't think being paid 30% of what their male counterparts make for a performance is asking too much.

Is it really reasonable to pretend that the WNBA is a significant part of the $15 Billion industry?

G-league players are also among the top 600 talents in said industry. Do they also deserve to be paid 30% of what NBA players make?

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Is it really reasonable to pretend that the WNBA is a significant part of the $15 Billion industry?

G-league players are also among the top 600 talents in said industry. Do they also deserve to be paid 30% of what NBA players make?

The WNBA is not a signficant part of professional basketball. It wouldn't lose money if it was.

G-league is a farm league for the NBA. Average salary is like $35k

 

[Phatguysrule]

Is it really reasonable to pretend that the WNBA is a significant part of the $15 Billion industry?

G-league players are also among the top 600 talents in said industry. Do they also deserve to be paid 30% of what NBA players make?

No, I don't think that's the same.

They are not at the peak of their profession, therefore not among the top 600. Though they are likely among the top 1000, after WNBA Players have been accounted for.

WNBA players are at the top of their profession and should be compensated as such. This is how we keep building women's sports so we can be as competitive as possible on the world stage. Making opportunities like this for female athletes makes athletics more valuable overall. It increases the size of the pie by creating more sports fans.

 

[Phatguysrule]

The WNBA is not a signficant part of professional basketball. It wouldn't lose money if it was.

G-league is a farm league for the NBA. Average salary is like $35k

Because they can still make the NBA. They aren't at the top of their profession.

But I'm fine with the NBA paying these guys better as well.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Because they can still make the NBA. They aren't at the top of their profession.

But I'm fine with the NBA paying these guys better as well.

What if they allowed WNBA players to play in the NBA?

 

[Phatguysrule]

What if they allowed WNBA players to play in the NBA?

That would be interesting. Problem is WNBA players can't defend NBA players. But they can shoot the lights out.

I think allowing WNBA players is fine, if they can actually compete with the physicality. But I think that would turn into more of a circus and might end up costing the NBA more than just paying WNBA players better.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

No, I don't think that's the same.

They are not at the peak of their profession, therefore not among the top 600. Though they are likely among the top 1000, after WNBA Players.

WNBA players are at the top of their profession and should be compensated as such.

If we're considering professional basketball as a whole to be a $15 billion industry, then the WNBA players are not really at the top of their profession.

If we're saying they should be paid more because they're at the top of their profession, then their profession (women's basketball) should be considered independently.

I feel like you want to have it both ways, and I just don't think it's a reasonable way to evaluate this topic.

 

[twobullz]

The most recent numbers I could find was 2018 and the WNBA has lost on average 10 million a year as a league. More fans are not going to show up at the games just because you are paying the players more. So if you have a large increase in salaries for a league that his a net negative, how in the world are you covering those salaries?

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

If we're considering professional basketball as a whole to be a $15 billion industry, then the WNBA players are not really at the top of their profession.

If we're saying they should be paid more because they're at the top of their profession, then their profession (women's basketball) should be considered independently.

I feel like you want to have it both ways, and I just don't think it's a reasonable way to evaluate this topic.

They should try to build organically, without having to rely on the NBA at all. It should be self-sustaining. I mean its a bigger story when NBA players attend WNBA games than the WNBA games itself.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

This is how we keep building women's sports so we can be as competitive as possible on the world stage. Making opportunities like this for female athletes makes athletics more valuable overall. It increases the size of the pie by creating more sports fans.

This aspect is completely separate, and I would then ask as a follow-up, which entity is or should be most interested in making women's sports competitive on the world's stage, and opening up opportunities for female athletes, and why? I would say that that entity would be the entity who would then be able to best gauge the value to them in investing in WNBA salaries.

I think it's been made clear that the NBA doesn't see that investment as worthwhile to them.

 

[tlongII]

No, I don't think that's the same.

They are not at the peak of their profession, therefore not among the top 600. Though they are likely among the top 1000, after WNBA Players have been accounted for.

WNBA players are at the top of their profession and should be compensated as such. This is how we keep building women's sports so we can be as competitive as possible on the world stage. Making opportunities like this for female athletes makes athletics more valuable overall. It increases the size of the pie by creating more sports fans.

WNBA players are already the best in the world among women so I don't think your argument about being competitive as possible on the world stage makes sense.

 

[Phatguysrule]

This aspect is completely separate, and I would then ask as a follow-up, which entity is or should be most interested in making women's sports competitive on the world's stage, and opening up opportunities for female athletes, and why? I would say that that entity would be the entity who would then be able to best gauge the value to them in investing in WNBA salaries.

I think it's been made clear that the NBA doesn't see that investment as worthwhile to them.

Well, they started and support the WNBA, so they do see the value.

But they understandably want to spend as little as possible on it.

This is why I've said I think making tax incentives to help the NBA with this would be worthwhile.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Well, they started and support the WNBA, so they do see the value.

But they understandably want to spend as little as possible on it.

This is why I've said I think making tax incentives to help the NBA with this would be worthwhile.

They see value in it's existence, but obviously they don't see value in making the WNBA the world's highest-paying women's league.

However, you're saying that the federal government has a vested interest in US women's basketball being the most lucrative women's basketball opportunity worldwide? How exactly does creating more sports fans (as you mentioned in a prior post as a driving reason for paying WNBA players more) benefit American society as a whole to a degree that it's worthy of millions of dollars of government subsidy?

 

[Phatguysrule]

WNBA players are already the best in the world among women so I don't think your argument about being competitive as possible on the world stage makes sense.

True, but they started losing before the WNBA was started. The WNBA and title 9 have been what has kept us at the top.

I just think paying the best female basketball players in the world what we pay the best garbage men is stupid. They have worked longer and harder on a much more difficult to attain goal than any garbage man, and their pay should reflect that.

And there is no downside to paying them better. The NBA wouldn't even notice it. Especially if there were tax incentives.

And if they could use that tax to even out the state to state tax differences of the NBA that could help make the NBA morw competitive as well.

 

[Phatguysrule]

They see value in it's existence, but obviously they don't see value in making the WNBA the world's highest-paying women's league.

However, you're saying that the federal government has a vested interest in US women's basketball being the most lucrative women's basketball opportunity worldwide? How exactly does creating more sports fans (as you mentioned in a prior post as a driving reason for paying WNBA players more) benefit American society as a whole to a degree that it's worthy of millions of dollars of government subsidy?

How does NASA? How does Google? How do oil companies?

You're giving half of the population more incentive to be productive and better themselves as opposed spending all day on tiktok.

This seems like a very positive thing to me.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

How does NASA? How does Google? How do oil companies?

You're giving half of the population more incentive to be productive and better themselves as opposed spending all day on tiktok.

The value of NASA/Google/oil subsidies is not the question here. Whether those have value is a separate debate. The question is--what would be the value of WNBA subsidies.

I don't know that most would believe that people pursuing a basketball career constitutes "bettering themselves". Very few women who are not already driven enough to pursue viable employment opportunities "as opposed to spending all day on tiktok" will suddenly become contributing members of society because WNBA players make more. Certainly not enough to justify the tens of millions of tax dollars you're calling for.

 

[Natebishop3]

I don't understand why the entertainment industry is so hard to grasp.

Movies, television, sports..... are part of the entertainment industry. If your product doesn't make money, you don't make money. Plenty of movie stars who used to be big are now gone because they had too many flops. You can try to insert your social agenda into entertainment all you want, but if people don't want to watch it, it won't make money and it will go away. If people are unhappy with the compensation that women get from sports, they should support those sports more.

How much womens sports do you watch @Phatguysrule

How many jerseys have you purchased?

The NFL and NBA are profitable because people watch them. Their franchises are worth billions of dollars. It's pretty cut and dry. We're not talking about manufacturing cars here. We're talking about a product that needs eyes to watch it or it's not profitable. Sadly, women's sports is not that profitable. If you were running a business and you were barely scraping by, would you pay your employees more money? Would you go into a deficit to pay your employees more? Would you go out of business just so you could pay your employees more money for a short period of time?

 

[riverman]

You have to fill an arena with fans and sell a ton of merch to get big paychecks in sports...from what I've seen in both college and the WNBA there's usually an echo in the arena....it's not a thriving success not that it couldn't blossom into that. I went to Oregon State games when my son was a student and the men's basketball program had a ton of fan support...the women's ..empty seats. It can change but it's going to take an image makeover from what I see to make it more of a draw than baseball which it's not as of yet...women's softball and baseball is much more popular

 

[riverman]

I don't understand why the entertainment industry is so hard to grasp.

Movies, television, sports..... are part of the entertainment industry. If your product doesn't make money, you don't make money. Plenty of movie stars who used to be big are now gone because they had too many flops. You can try to insert your social agenda into entertainment all you want, but if people don't want to watch it, it won't make money and it will go away. If people are unhappy with the compensation that women get from sports, they should support those sports more.

How much womens sports do you watch @Phatguysrule

How many jerseys have you purchased?

The NFL and NBA are profitable because people watch them. Their franchises are worth billions of dollars. It's pretty cut and dry. We're not talking about manufacturing cars here. We're talking about a product that needs eyes to watch it or it's not profitable. Sadly, women's sports is not that profitable. If you were running a business and you were barely scraping by, would you pay your employees more money? Would you go into a deficit to pay your employees more? Would you go out of business just so you could pay your employees more money for a short period of time?

you beat me to it and I agree.