Portion of salaries of athletes, celebrities should be rerouted

Joanna Northrup (Monday, April 28)

We need to get a grip on things. America’s priorities are insanely out of line. Today, we see people who shape the futures of our children, such as teachers, social workers, and those who participate in after school programs like Big Brothers, Big Sisters get minimal payment for the things they are doing for our society by shaping our children.

However, professional athletes are making a steal in the amount they are being paid. For what? They are paid astronomical amounts for catching a ball and running, making a ball inside a basket, or having arm strength to send a ball flying out of the parks. Actors and actresses and famous musicians are seeing the same outrageously high pay. The worst truth is that we have a gross loss of what should truly be our first priority.

This money is being spent on sports players, actors, and musicians and could be put so we no longer deny students across America of an education about music, art, and theatre, just so we can reach what the US government sees as “necessary.”

These cuts are brought about by the No Child Left Behind Act. This had a good goal, but went sour. The point is that if we were to look at our priorities, we would be able to tell that we are making some very unwise decisions with money, that could be put to much better use.

In the 2004-2005 professional sports season, the total value of player salaries and other benefits added up to $1.74 billion. The NFL had a base salary of $230,000 and that does not include the signing bonus, which varies from player to player. Actors, actresses, and musicians are being paid equally crazy amounts of money. People like this, though, will soon not be around us if we do not do something.

The excess money that these sports players, actors, and musicians get paid could go to better use. If we docked the pay of every professional sports player, actor, and famous musician by even $5,000 a year, this money could go to funding the music and art programs that are being taken out of the curriculum for many of the schools around the United States. These schools could still use the same amount of money on subjects like math, science, English, and foreign languages that the U.S. government does not see as so dispensable.

Regardless of whether the No Child Left Behind Act is actually working, the law is now on the books and we need to do what we can to assure that the children of America are getting the well-rounded education that they need. If that means taking money from areas such as the sports and entertainment industry, then that’s what needs to be, and has to be done.

15 Responses to "Portion of salaries of athletes, celebrities should be rerouted"


Reader
April 27, 2008 9:33 pm
oh ya, so like socialism. cool.
Kevin Nardi
April 28, 2008 3:37 am
I know I work for the same newspaper that you do, Joanna, but this is severely uneducated opinion, and incredibly bad writing.

You seem to have some underlying misconceptions with the way the world, the U.S. government, and our economy actually function. You say if "we docked the pay of" athletes, actors, and musicians, then we could spend that money on education. Who is "we," exactly, and how would that money get from their pay cut to schools? Are you advocating a government mandate for a flat $5,000 tax against professionals in the entertainment industry? ALL of them? Or only ones that make a certain amount of money? Are you advocating socialism across the board? Socialism is an interesting topic, and you could make some good arguments in support of it. But you don't, because I'm not sure you realize that you are talking about socialism.

And why athletes, actors, and "famous musicians," exactly? Why do you pinpoint the only semi-rich? Why do you leave out, for instance, bankers, futures traders, and mega-corporations? To limit your scope to the entertainment industry seems an infantile thing to do.

Maybe what you MEAN to say is that WE (consumers) spend an inordinate amount of our money on our entertainment, and not enough on educating our children. I would agree with that! That would be an argument about the value systems of our culture, and maybe you could talk about ways that we can change our perspectives to spend our money on wiser investments. But instead, you demonize the people working in the entertainment industry, who are only there because WE (yes, you and me) pay them to be there. Remember, that is how our economy works.

The stupid thing is that I agree that we need better education and that entertainers make too much money (because we spend too much money on entertainment). But your suggested policy to fix that is so bad that it hurts me.

And I have no idea how the No Child Left Behind Act slipped into this article twice, because you didn't mention any of its effects on education, nor how it affects monetary policy.
alum
April 28, 2008 10:51 am
Great idea, Joanna, let's give government full control over all private industries, then dock everyone's pay, then spread the extra money around equally to everyone. Sure, socialism has never worked in any other country that's tried it, but let's try it here! great thinking!
Benjamin J. Howard
April 28, 2008 9:56 pm
First off, Kudos to Mr. Nardi for respecting both himself and Ms. Northrup enough to respond using his full name.

Secondly, I would agree with Mr Nardi's assessment that the article is poorly researched with a confused focus. It fails to consider that the musicians, sports stars, and actors Ms. Northrup rails against represent the top 1-2% of their respective industries. For example, while a movie super-star like Will Smith can command millions of dollar for work on a single film, according to the US Department of Labor, the average SAG member (Screen Actors Guild) earns $5,000 or less per year from acting, often having to support his/her acting career with secondary employment. The same can be said of your "average" musician or athlete - a tiny fraction of the men and women in each industry make millions from their work, and in fact the pay scale these select few earn are not, as Mr. Nardi pointed out, drastically out of proportion for what is paid to the top performers in many other industries, including those of finance, banking, etc.

To respond to "alum", your commentary is reduced in value greatly by your unwillingness to put your name down and stand behind your words. Further, you could also use a bit more research before you write. The majority of Western Europe has been functioning under various forms of democratic socialism for decades. Their levels of economic success and stability are comparable with those of the US, and many have far fewer homeless and hungry citizens than we in the US do. There might be something to this whole "socialism" thing, in moderation of course.

To return to the point, I whole heartedly agree with Ms. Northrup's call to spend more time and money in support of America's failing education system. However, I believe the answer is not more government regulation. It's wiser spending, more citizen involvement at all levels of government, and increased accountability for our elected officials.

A+ for tackling a difficult subject, Ms. Northrup. Your research and through-line could use some work though.
Karl Marx
April 28, 2008 10:41 pm
I love Joanna's ideas
Karl Marx
April 28, 2008 11:06 pm
I like your style, Joanna.
Joseph Stalin
April 28, 2008 11:06 pm
WELL DONE JOANNA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pravda
April 28, 2008 11:28 pm
We might have a job opening for you.
this is dumb
April 29, 2008 2:47 am
Why was she ever hired?
You're dumb
April 29, 2008 9:55 am
Why were you ever born?
Kevin Nardi
April 29, 2008 6:20 pm
Man, the comments on this site remind me of YouTube comments. Except those are from 12-year-olds, and these are from college students.
Hornet 4 Life
April 30, 2008 8:40 am
I'm glad that someone finally agrees with me on athletics/celebrities vs. Educators/Academia. I understand that sports can be fun to watch and participate in. But, I agree more with the idea that those in Academia are brutally underpaid. At the end of my time at ESU, from BA to MA, I will have accrued nearly $40,000 in debt. As a future educator, I won't make that much a year. However, it is acceptible to toss around a bloated pig for millions? If it were up to me, sports would have no place in academia because academia is designed to open minds and enforce understanding. But, like I said before, I understand why we have them. All I really want to say is that those who educate hold a lasting effect on the world, and should be paid as such; whereas those who toss balls around and run in str8 lines should not quite get millions a year. I could see them surviving on $35k - $45k per annum.
Hugo Chavez
April 30, 2008 9:37 am
Si! I like you tinking my good comrade! After you get tat in place, go after big business by windfall taxing them in the good times, den just have de government move in and take over all industry like I have done! From each according to their ability, to each according to their need, just like they did in the good ole' USSR! er, well, I guess that didn't work out too well, but we can do it right this time around! Power to de people!
Joanna Northrup
April 30, 2008 10:56 am
As this was the last column I am writing for the bulletin, at least this year, I wanted to thank you all for your comments. I enjoy hearing both sides of my opinions and am glad we have a university who is not afraid to speak out. The road a writer travels is often paved with a lot of criticism and I need all of that I can get being a freshman here at ESU. Maybe it is a bit unprofessional to comment on my own article, and I apologize if it offends any of you, but I already got the chance to thank Benjamin Howard in person, and now I would like to thank you all the same.
May you all have a blessed summer, and thank you again.
Joanna
Pez
May 13, 2008 11:38 am
I don't know which is worse: Kevin Nardless and his senseless drivel, or the fact that this article made me want to spray puke.