- This topic has 17 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Who said anything about communism? Me, that’s who.
A society that’s classless and where the wealth is shared equally – essentially, that’s communism. It didn’t work in real life and it definitely won’t work in the Premier League.
Yes there are plenty of players that would play for less than Rooney, but if you want a player that’s the calibre of Rooney and that would bring in the shirt sales etc, you’d have to pay £40m+ for them before even considering their salary. In United’s case it’s better to stick with what you know.
And yes, Rooney does get paid more per week than League Two clubs do in a year. But Rooney’s name sells football kit in China and MUTV subscriptions in India; Accrington Stanley don’t.
No, it might not be right, but neither is Bruce Forsyth still appearing on TV every week or talentless goons like One Direction touring the world and amassing £25m.
But I didn’t say that we should have a classless society where everyone is paid the same – far from it. I just think £300k per week is an insane amount of money for playing football. Just as I think it is an insane amount of money for nursing. That doesn’t mean I think everyone should be paid the same – there are clearly skills (useful like brain surgery or not like football) that are rare and not commodity so quite rightly can command premiums. Just as, in a free market, capitalist society, there are skills such as nursing or cleaning that are more common/easily attainable and therefore subject to greater competition and lower prices.
My original post was actually reacting to the word “earn”. In the case if Rooney what has changed about his talent or ability that means he can now earn £300k vs the £100k or whatever he was “earning” a few years ago? In my book he’s not as good a player as he used to be, so how is it that he can “earn” (or should I say “be paid”) so much more?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
