Locked out: Could Gregg Popovich and RC Buford solve the economy?

by

On Aug. 2, the United States will reach the limits of its debt ceiling. Unless Democrat and Republican leaders start negotiating in good faith between now and then, there is a chance our government will begin to default on its payments.

Not long after the United States could hypothetically start cancelling payments, the NBA will begin cancelling games.

Whether it is a lockout or budget talks, this is, at heart, a tale of billionaires and millionaires fighting each other with little regard for those that actually empower both—the middle class tax paying voter that would have to save an entire paycheck to afford a quality family outing at a game.

It is sports as a reflection of society at its worst.

Connecting the two issues is a stretch. Some would say that the struggling economy which has led to the Washington deficit debate is the reason the NBA stands where it is now, except, when was the last time the league was this popular?

The common thread here is both showcase a common problem that goes beyond sports or politics (well, maybe not politics). Negotiating and compromise are dying arts.

Democrats and Republicans. Owners and Players. At the negotiating table everyone has an allegiance, a side to take. In doing so, each have lost sight of the bigger picture: they are representatives of something much bigger, be it our nation’s government, or the NBA. In order to function properly, both sides must be working in harmony.

To the point: when did negotiations and bargaining become more about being absolutely right and less about finding common ground?

If our leaders’ agendas were to find a solution that works for everyone, for the sanctity of a game or country, then wouldn’t it have been prudent to have begun negotiations much earlier than at the last minute? A lockout has been on the horizon for several years, the nation at its spending limit since May. Yet only recently have talks heated up into anything serious. Why? Because with time to act, one side cannot exert much pressure on the other.

Negotiations are increasingly about power and leverage, and less about a common goal. And when one side takes up an extreme, the other must willingly or unwillingly take another. Eventually, neither side budges until considerable damage has been done to both.

There are a small fraction of Republicans ready to watch the United State default on its debt, risking a downgrade to its credit rating, thereby putting the economy in peril, just to make their point. Similarly, there are a small number of owners willing to let the NBA season go up in flames just to put the new CBA at their utmost advantage. The need to present a unified front against the other side lends far too much credence to a minority falling too far down one extreme or another.

Instead of instilling confidence in the public that the issue will be resolved, these parties are waging a public relations battle trying to attach blame to the opposition. It has devolved into something somehow even pettier than a bunch of wealthy, powerful men bickering over huge sums of money. Removing the players likeness from websites, perhaps a few Nazi references on the Glenn Beck show.

It is a ploy no one can win. Because when it comes to politics, right now the general public does not care who is at fault. All that matters is that there are games come this fall, and jobs to help pay for those tickets.

  • Bry

    I don’t buy that version at all. Where was this Republican sentiment when they demanded (successfully) that Obama and the dems extend the Bush tax cuts, even to wealthiest Americans. Were the Republicans forcing that completely irresponsible (not too mention arguably immoral) fiscal tactic “for the sake of all Americans?” The same party that screamed “you don’t raise taxes during a recession” (even though Obama was really just trying to get rid of Bush’s recent tax cuts) is now claiming that the country will be lost if we go further into debt. I’m no rocket science, but giving people who make more than a quarter of a million a year a big tax cut, and then demanding it’s extention, doesn’t strike me as looking out for ‘the sake of all Americans’.

  • Bry

    Why is everybody so hard on Darko? He only makes 5 million a year, and at least he’s a starter. If you took 5-7 minutes away from Bonner this past season, and gave them to Tiago instead, I doubt there would be much to criticize Pop about.Â

  • Alan

    Yeah, I got that “version” from Senator Tom Coburn (of the Gang of 6) who probably just made that up. Â In 2006, he teamed up with then-Senator Obama to create http://www.usaspending.gov/, an online database of all federal spending.

  • Colin Rigney

    Whatever Bush did (and he grew government a lot), Obama has accelerated it. If you haven’t looked lately, the US has already spent $1.5 trillion this year and its only July! I don’t buy “I inherited this mess” for a freakin’ second.Â

    Â

  • Alan

    Having moved to San Antonio 12 years ago from out of state, I couldn’t be more proud of the Spurs and what a class-act they are (Tony???), so I have no doubt RC and Pop could bring sanity to the national economy debate.

    That made me think what the Washington bureaucrats would do to the  Spurs if they had the chance.  Based on my observations the last decade or so, I am afraid they might:

    1. Â Change the name to something less “aggressive” — after all, a Spur is not only cruel to horses, but were probably being worn in the past by those who were cruel to Native Americans as well.

    2. Â Bring in one of their own to be GM; someone who has extensive experience in a competitive environment. Â The Postmaster General has the perfect resume battling UPS and FEDEX so successfully. Â His first order of business is to sign his own “Big3″ of MVP’s and scoring champs to max long-term deals: Â AI, T-MAC and Shaq.

    3. Â Ticket prices will need to be based on the buyers income. Â For those whose annual salary is between $40-$50K, the ticket prices do not change. Â However, for those who do not pay any Federal Income Tax, it would not be fair for them to have to pay for tickets; therefore, 47% of the seats in the AT&T Center will be free to them. Â Fortunately, those making over $250K will have no problem making up the difference — especially Peter Holt and his friends in the top 5% can afford to pay $75,000 per game.

    4. Â It will be the policy to leave every other ticket gate unattended so that those who want to come to the game without tickets don’t get hassled. Â The users are told that asking to see one’s ticket stub is strictly prohibited.

    5. Â To facilitate season ticket and luxury box sales, the classic government telephone answering tree will be implemented so that team employees won’t have to waste time talking to customers……..

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    Ok, let me see if I understand what you mean. A thief hacks into your bank account and steal your life savings. You go into court. You demand that he gives it all back. The thief demands that he be allowed to keep it because you don’t have sufficient proof that he stole it. So you start gathering your evidence, requesting subpoenas and depositions, and making arguments to support your case. Judge Jesse intervenes and says he was tired of the bickering saying “People don’t know how to negotiate anymore. Because one side has to ‘win’, often nobody does.” So he decides that, in order to get a deal done, he will give each of you half of the money. And now you are satisfied since, after all, you did not have to “win”.Â

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    “Were the Republicans forcing that completely irresponsible (not too mention arguably immoral) fiscal tactic “for the sake of all Americans?”

    Yes it was. You keep ignoring the facts. The Bush tax cuts were an idea by the economists long before Bush actually implemented them. It should be obvious that once taxes get to a certain level the taxes gained by the government are offset by the productivity lost by withdrawal of the taxes from the tax producing economy. Tax recipts then actually decline with higher taxes. The economist had predicted that would start to happen at around 25-30% taxation. The top level of marginal taxation was already above that. So Bush proposed and the congress accepted the tax cuts.

    The Democrats predicted that the rich would pay a smaller portion of overall taxes. In fact the economists were correct and the wealthiest tax payers actually ended up paying a larger proportion of the taxes than they were before.
    Â
    “Where was this Republican sentiment when they demanded (successfully) that Obama and the dems extend the Bush tax cuts. Were the Republicans forcing that completely irresponsible (not too mention arguably immoral) fiscal tactic “for the sake of all Americans”

    The Democrats controlled the Presidency and both houses of congress when that happened. The Republicans could not force anything. The reason that the tax cuts were not repealed is that the Democrats knew the facts as well as the Republicans did and many decided to put the country ahead of ideology and voted to keep the cuts.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    Don’t forget the Democratic party and the Social Security System.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    Â Right, too many parasites and not enough producers.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    Woops, I thought that was a photoshop edit of picture, and a sloppy one at that.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    Have you ever considered that what you call the “center” is not?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VKNUHEVREWKGPNLYBK5YEFIU54 Bill

    RIght Hobson13. Though the Democrats have almost never shown any fiscal discipline the current situation required a major assist by the Repulicans. I think the beginnings can be traced back to the Fed’s 1998 monetary loosening during the Asian Debt crisis and the Fed’s failing to re-thighten afterwards (No excuses for Alan Greenspan. He should have known better).

  • Hobson13

    Good points, Bill.Â

  • Colin Rigney

    Yeah, he inherited a mess and is making it worse. Its not an argument, but reality.Â

    Your point is…….?Â

  • Colin Rigney

    A real change doesn’t occur by acquiescing one’s principles for the sake of compromise. It needs to start somewhere. Thus, the Tea Party are standing by their principles for the most part.

    I think the Republicans are in the process of hijacking the Tea Party anyhow.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jesse-Blanchard/516723302 Jesse Blanchard

    None of the arguments, statements, or talking points in the original piece or all of the comments, have anything to do with the scenario you just presented.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jesse-Blanchard/516723302 Jesse Blanchard

    In my, and the media’s defense, Alan…they kind of make it easy. The most extreme of the Tea Party group are often the loudest and most ignorant. It’s easy to spot Tri-corner hats, calls for war against Obama, “birthers”, etc. and poke fun. Tea Party leadership (to be fair, ALL leadership) can do a better job of asking for better from their followers instead of just pandering to them to boast their numbers.

  • Titletown99030507d

    You mean the 43rd president already fucked up this country.

  • Jonathan

    Of course. I understand it’s subjective. My whole point actually was that this guy was throwing out his accusations and opinions without ever, as far as I could tell, considering that very question.

    A lot of times people with the most extreme opinions talk the “loudest”. But that doesn’t change where the center is, and I was trying to balance his comments by pointing that out. I strongly believe considering Obama as anything other than centrist is nuts. That’s my opinion, and I feel I presented it as such. Also, for the record, what I consider to be the center is different from what I consider to be right, obviously. (I guess it’s pretty pointless responding so late, but I felt like doing so nonetheless…)