Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[Buce]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

So by that judgement nobody should really be proud of anything. 

 

That isn't what I'm saying.

 

You have every right to be proud of things you are responsible for - your achievements, your behaviour - but being proud of being British is like being proud of being white or ginger or tall or brown-eyed.

[Benguin]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

That isn't what I'm saying.

 

You have every right to be proud of things you are responsible for - your achievements, your behaviour - but being proud of being British is like being proud of being white or ginger or tall or brown-eyed.

Pride isn’t merely derived from ones own achievments but also from institutes, organisations, clubs or other variations that one is associated with. I think for a lot of people, their country falls on that list. The same can be said for discontent, embarrassment or disgust. 

 

To be honest I dont often feel pride where the country is concerned but I definitley do with Leicester and it’s luck and chance I was born there. I don’t find it wierd at all.

[Buce]

16 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Pride isn’t merely derived from ones own achievments but also from institutes, organisations, clubs or other variations that one is associated with. I think for a lot of people, their country falls on that list. The same can be said for discontent, embarrassment or disgust. 

 

To be honest I dont often feel pride where the country is concerned but I definitley do with Leicester and it’s luck and chance I was born there. I don’t find it wierd at all.

 

You’re entitled to that opinion, for sure, but I disagree and so does the dictionary definition of the word:

 

Proud

’feeling deep pleasure or satisfaction as a result of one's own achievements, qualities, or possessions or those of someone with whom one is closely associated.’

 

 

Edited 28 May 2019 by Buce

[String fellow]

3 hours ago, The Bear said:

I've reliably been told that they were purchased from Asda and Sainsburys. 95p per tin. Though only at specific local branches apparently, so it could be hot and miss if you find any. They're a green/blue colour then purple at the bottom. 

Many thanks for the heads up on that. It looks like this thread has now moved on to the subject of pride.  

[Benguin]

34 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

You’re entitled to that opinion, for sure, but I disagree and so does the dictionary definition of the word:

 

Proud

’feeling deep pleasure or satisfaction as a result of one's own achievements, qualities, or possessions or those of someone with whom one is closely associated.’

 

 

You missed out this bit: , or from qualities or possessions that are widely admired.

 

People consider different places/cultures as having different qualities and so one can derive pride from the qualities of the culture they fit into. 

[bovril]

I get a tinge of pride when England does well in sport, or when an English person or group achieves something, or when I see tourists enjoying a beautiful place in England. I know deep down it's bollocks as being any nationality is a twist of fate, but I think it's harmless. It's very natural. It's the same reason I'm happy to see positive things in Italy or Bulgaria - I lived there and have friends there. I wouldn't feel the same about Spain, for example. As long as you don't use it as an excuse to look down your nose at others I think it's fine. 

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, Samilktray said:

Being proud to be British, supporting British clubs in the champions league, having an England flag anywhere on your house. All unbelievably weird 

I’ve always found that attitude extremely weird, personally. 

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

I get a tinge of pride when England does well in sport, or when an English person or group achieves something, or when I see tourists enjoying a beautiful place in England. I know deep down it's bollocks as being any nationality is a twist of fate, but I think it's harmless. It's very natural. It's the same reason I'm happy to see positive things in Italy or Bulgaria - I lived there and have friends there. I wouldn't feel the same about Spain, for example. As long as you don't use it as an excuse to look down your nose at others I think it's fine. 

Pretty much this, tbh. Problem is there's way too many folks in way too many places who do do the bolded bit and that's where you get the problems.

 

There's probably a whole psychological tome that can be written on how pride, tribalism and the like are mixed together in the human brain, but this isn't the thread for it.

[Guest]

As good as he is Ricardo is wildly overrated by many on FT - evenmoreso than Tielemans. It's like Chilwell last year in reverse.

[stix]

3 hours ago, FIF said:

As good as he is Ricardo is wildly overrated by many on FT - evenmoreso than Tielemans. It's like Chilwell last year in reverse.

 

I don’t know how reliable whoscored.com is but I found this

 

 

 

To be in the same top 10 list as some of those players I think says a lot. 1 of only 2 right backs in that list. 

Edited 31 May 2019 by stix

[Nalis]

Ledley King was an above average player at best. 

 

There seems to be a false perception that he would have been as good as Franz fvckin Beckenbauer let alone Ferdinand or Terry if he didnt have as many injuries.

 

Nostalgia can do strange things to people.

[deejdeej]

23 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Ledley King was an above average player at best. 

 

There seems to be a false perception that he would have been as good as Franz fvckin Beckenbauer let alone Ferdinand or Terry if he didnt have as many injuries.

 

Nostalgia can do strange things to people.

Almost as annoying as the 'Scholes was one of the true greats' brigade.

[Buce]

51 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Ledley King was an above average player at best. 

 

There seems to be a false perception that he would have been as good as Franz fvckin Beckenbauer let alone Ferdinand or Terry if he didnt have as many injuries.

 

Nostalgia can do strange things to people.

 

Yeah. 

 

Nostalgia isn’t what it used to be. 

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Yeah. 

 

Nostalgia isn’t what it used to be. 

I’m having that.

[the fox]

Adults talking about how Footballers and professional athletes shouldn't be paid more than heart surgeons and school teachers.

 

 

Is simple concepts of economics nonexistent to them?

[Guest]

14 hours ago, the fox said:

Adults talking about how Footballers and professional athletes shouldn't be paid more than heart surgeons and school teachers.

 

 

Is simple concepts of economics nonexistent to them?

I'm guessing worth is irrelevant to economics.

[ajthefox]

4 hours ago, FIF said:

I'm guessing worth is irrelevant to economics.

Moral worth obviously yes, but if you realise that then surely you understand on some level that your argument is fatally flawed.

 

 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

Moral worth obviously yes, but if you realise that then surely you understand on some level that your argument is fatally flawed.

 

 

I'm not arguing anything. I gave a different point of view and tried to show the fox that supply and demand or any other economic idea doesn't actually mean that something is correct or true or the answer. Morally I'd say that surgeons and teachers should be paid more than footballers. 

 

I'd like to say that before teaching "Economics" was my speciality. I love economics but it isn't a proof.

[ajthefox]

16 minutes ago, FIF said:

I'm not arguing anything. I gave a different point of view and tried to show the fox that supply and demand or any other economic idea doesn't actually mean that something is correct or true or the answer. Morally I'd say that surgeons and teachers should be paid more than footballers. 

 

I'd like to say that before teaching "Economics" was my speciality. I love economics but it isn't a proof.

I knew that FIF, I was just saying you in general terms.

 

Obviously economics changes over time, but the reason footballers get paid so much is because the world (more specifically in England in the PL obviously) loves football. The money doesn't come from no-where. It's not all fans obviously, but if everyone decided tomorrow they didn't give a toss about football then it would all collapse pretty quickly.

 

Unless people stop caring, attending and funding, (ignoring seismic external events that make it physically impossible en masse) the wage imbalance won't shift significantly.

 

But people won't stop caring, because football and sport in general appeal to several of our most basic human needs.

 

Surely the above is fairly obvious to most people.

Edited 3 June 2019 by ajthefox

[Guest]

2 hours ago, ajthefox said:

I knew that FIF, I was just saying you in general terms.

 

Obviously economics changes over time, but the reason footballers get paid so much is because the world (more specifically in England in the PL obviously) loves football. The money doesn't come from no-where. It's not all fans obviously, but if everyone decided tomorrow they didn't give a toss about football then it would all collapse pretty quickly.

 

Unless people stop caring, attending and funding, (ignoring seismic external events that make it physically impossible en masse) the wage imbalance won't shift significantly.

 

But people won't stop caring, because football and sport in general appeal to several of our most basic human needs.

 

Surely the above is fairly obvious to most people.

So in effect you are claiming that people would prefer to pay for entertainment rather than saving a (their own or a relative's) life or education (their own or a relative's).

 

Surely most people can see that isn't the case and therefore the reason that footballers get paid more than surgeons or teachers is NOT because they are worth more nor because everyone loves football.

 

I'm surprised that you pointed out the weakness in my argument without seeing the falsity of your own.

 

Answer me this?  Somebody you love has a car accident. They will be fine with an operation but will die without it. Do you a) Pay to go and watch a football match or b) pay for a surgeon to save their life?

Or if you prefer would you decide to buy a season ticket to your favourite football team or pay for a year's education for your offspring, you can only afford one option?

 

Do you now see why your belief in the reason that footballers correctly get paid more than surgeons or teachers is wrong?

 

How lucky you are to be born in a country that doesn't make you choose in the aforementioned situations.

[Carl the Llama]

7 minutes ago, FIF said:

So in effect you are claiming that people would prefer to pay for entertainment rather than saving a (their own or a relative's) life or education (their own or a relative's).

 

Surely most people can see that isn't the case and therefore the reason that footballers get paid more than surgeons or teachers is NOT because they are worth more nor because everyone loves football.

 

I'm surprised that you pointed out the weakness in my argument without seeing the falsity of your own.

 

Answer me this?  Somebody you love has a car accident. They will be fine with an operation but will die without it. Do you a) Pay to go and watch a football match or b) pay for a surgeon to save their life?

Or if you prefer would you decide to buy a season ticket to your favourite football team or pay for a year's education for your offspring, you can only afford one option?

 

Do you now see why your belief in the reason that footballers correctly get paid more than surgeons or teachers is wrong?

 

How lucky you are to be born in a country that doesn't make you choose in the aforementioned situations.

Does a surgeon hold more value to society than a footballer?  Yes.  Does that mean their work should be valued more highly in monetary terms than a footballer's?  Logically yes.  These are both ideas I imagine most people have no issue with and I don't think anybody's really disagreed with you there.

 

But.

 

As you're well aware we live in a capitalist system, one which makes the football industry more valuable to the private economy because it's marketable and generates ad revenue.  You can't really make a market out of people's surgeries for many obvious reasons so there's really no way for them to generate nearly enough money to compete with footballer's wages.  As you rightly stated, worth is irrelevant, it's what people will pay that matters.

 

That all said I'm firmly in the pay cap for footballers camp.  The fact that it's normal to hear figures in the tens of thousands per week is sadly dystopian.

[ajthefox]

42 minutes ago, FIF said:

So in effect you are claiming that people would prefer to pay for entertainment rather than saving a (their own or a relative's) life or education (their own or a relative's).

 

Surely most people can see that isn't the case and therefore the reason that footballers get paid more than surgeons or teachers is NOT because they are worth more nor because everyone loves football.

 

I'm surprised that you pointed out the weakness in my argument without seeing the falsity of your own.

 

Answer me this?  Somebody you love has a car accident. They will be fine with an operation but will die without it. Do you a) Pay to go and watch a football match or b) pay for a surgeon to save their life?

Or if you prefer would you decide to buy a season ticket to your favourite football team or pay for a year's education for your offspring, you can only afford one option?

 

Do you now see why your belief in the reason that footballers correctly get paid more than surgeons or teachers is wrong?

 

How lucky you are to be born in a country that doesn't make you choose in the aforementioned situations.

You have completely missed my point - I didn't claim the above and I would pay to save my family over watching a football match. For whatever reason I think we've taken a slight detour but I am not arguing against you and I don't need patronising about how lucky I am.

 

I was agreeing that moral worth is irrelevant to economics, but surely if people understand that, they can understand that footballers are not paid the money they are because people think they are (morally) worth paying more. It's just because the money is there to pay them and it makes financial sense (up to a limit) to. That's how it works in the world today - it's not a question of what is morally right or wrong. 

 

Unless of course those people don't fund football (directly or indirectly) and are happy to pay teachers and doctors themselves.

 

Also, what Carl said.

[stix]

1 hour ago, FIF said:

So in effect you are claiming that people would prefer to pay for entertainment rather than saving a (their own or a relative's) life or education (their own or a relative's).

 

Surely most people can see that isn't the case and therefore the reason that footballers get paid more than surgeons or teachers is NOT because they are worth more nor because everyone loves football.

 

I'm surprised that you pointed out the weakness in my argument without seeing the falsity of your own.

 

Answer me this?  Somebody you love has a car accident. They will be fine with an operation but will die without it. Do you a) Pay to go and watch a football match or b) pay for a surgeon to save their life?

Or if you prefer would you decide to buy a season ticket to your favourite football team or pay for a year's education for your offspring, you can only afford one option?

 

Do you now see why your belief in the reason that footballers correctly get paid more than surgeons or teachers is wrong?

 

How lucky you are to be born in a country that doesn't make you choose in the aforementioned situations.

 

£30 for lifesaving surgery?  

 

Terrible example

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, stix said:

 

£30 for lifesaving surgery?  

 

Terrible example

You'd be amazed at what a small problem could actually kill you then. 

 

Thank Britain for the NHS and Education and surgeons and teachers that don't demand footballer's wages.

[brucey]

There are tens of thousands of people around the world who are good enough to train and become competent heart surgeons.

There are only a few hundred people around the world good enough to be PL footballers.

Essentially it’s a far rarer talent. As an NHS worker myself, I have zero issue with how much footballers are paid.