BREAKING: Nike PAID DeAndre Ayton when he was at Arizona

[Ben Simmons]

Why are we taking news from Creepy Porn Lawyer as if hes relevant. Guy is as sketchy as they come

Exactly, his recent form could land him a job at CNN

[Clyde Frazier]

Oh no.

That should be legal.

[CycklopsGT]

this just in: giant companies built through unabated capitalism have no values or morals

Sweatshops and black markets are formed through abatements of capitalism. Not unabated capitalism.

'SwEAtShOPs r A PrOduCt of ReGuLatiOn"

Not all abatements of capitalism are regulations, and not all regulations are abatements. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Jables]

Good for him.

[HotTubMike]

Not trying to insult anyone but you have to be extremely naive to believe Nike is clean when Adidas is so dirty. They’re direct competitors competing in the same dirty pool that is big time ncaa basketball recruiting.

[CycklopsGT]

Okay so you agree black markets would still exist.

No, they wouldn't. Not in an-cap, minarchism, or anything resembling an actual laissez-faire system.

As far as sweatshops, market competition doesn't exist in pure capitalism. Market competition is a bad thing that firms will do everything in their power to remove.

Firms aren't allowed to do "everything in their power" in pure capitalism. I already addressed that.

For example, that might look like AT&T and Verizon partnering to buy American Tower and other tower companies and then immediately drop Tmobile and Sprint from their towers, destroying their businesses overnight (granted the entire wireless communications industry couldn't even exist without government protection, since without the ability to own a given spectrum, anyone could interfere with the signal for any reason).

You answered your own question.

...and without that set-up, AT&T would not be able to destroy T-Mobile and Sprints wireless network without violating a contractual agreement. Which would be a use of force and thus not allowed.

Except labor has even less leverage than Tmobile and Sprint in a pure capitalist society.

No it doesn't, and I suspect that I'm about to see a strawman version of "pure capitalist."

Examples can be see in the late 1800s. Corporations overmatch labor due to game theory, self interest of the actors.

Game Theory is purely unrelated to capitalism because 1) Game Theory exists in a set system of choices and payoffs that can be modeled. Capitalism is not a set system so there is no perfect strategy. And 2) John Nash's theories apply only to zero-sum games, capitalism is not zero-sum. "A Beautiful Mind" had a purely incorrect explanation of a Nash Equilibrium. These are not the only problems.

The corporation can act as a single unified party and split labor apart. Labor's gains really only occurred at the ballot box, not as much directly through bargaining (except where government helped support unions with certain favorable policies to allow them to bargain more effectively).

Oligopolies cannot form unless they have a means to force out competitors, otherwise the minute they start charging more than something is worth, they will incentivize others to join, or simply cause people to stop buying their service (and no, they cannot monopolize food, water, sunlight, land or other essentials). Keeping out competitors requires force, either through government intervention (which is not pure capitalism) or outright violence, which likewise isn't.

[clyde21]

Sweatshops and black markets are formed through abatements of capitalism. Not unabated capitalism.

'SwEAtShOPs r A PrOduCt of ReGuLatiOn"

Not all abatements of capitalism are regulations, and not all regulations are abatements. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Never said they were.

But please, do explain how 'abatements' are the cause behind sweatshops and child labor. We're all ears on that one.

[CycklopsGT]

'SwEAtShOPs r A PrOduCt of ReGuLatiOn"

Not all abatements of capitalism are regulations, and not all regulations are abatements. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Never said they were.

But please, do explain how 'abatements' are the cause behind sweatshops and child labor. We're all ears on that one.

I already did. One of the first things I went into was how sweatshops and child labor are caused by "abatements" (your choice of terms, not mine), go reply to the post.

If there's a politics board here, you can start a thread there. It would be boring for me but very educational for you.

[clyde21]

Not all abatements of capitalism are regulations, and not all regulations are abatements. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Never said they were.

But please, do explain how 'abatements' are the cause behind sweatshops and child labor. We're all ears on that one.

I already did. One of the first things I went into was how sweatshops and child labor are caused by "abatements" (your choice of terms, not mine), go reply to the post.

If there's a politics board here, you can start a thread there. It would be boring for me but very educational for you.

If you don't have anything of value to contribute you should probably stop quoting people.

[Ballerhogger]

Avenatti included no specifics to back up his allegation.

Let's keep it moving.

This is the guy who charged with fruad . so yea

[CycklopsGT]

Never said they were.

But please, do explain how 'abatements' are the cause behind sweatshops and child labor. We're all ears on that one.

I already did. One of the first things I went into was how sweatshops and child labor are caused by "abatements" (your choice of terms, not mine), go reply to the post.

If there's a politics board here, you can start a thread there. It would be boring for me but very educational for you.

If you don't have anything of value to contribute you should probably stop quoting people.

I notice that you have a lot of posturing, but absolutely no points. I explained how sweatshops form (exclusively in non-capitalist countries) as well as black markets, if you paid attention, you could even pick up what an "abatement" is by my definition (pssst, it involves forms of force and reducing freedom and can come from anyone) and why it's different from a regulation, which is purely government policy.

And as a bonus, I explained to the other guy how AT&T could not crowd out T-Mobile and Sprint, how oligopolies can't form in capitalist systems, and why Game Theory and specifically Nash's Theories don't apply to capitalism (the Nobel Committee was completely wrong).

...you don't look like you could dispute any of that.

[clyde21]

I already did. One of the first things I went into was how sweatshops and child labor are caused by "abatements" (your choice of terms, not mine), go reply to the post.

If there's a politics board here, you can start a thread there. It would be boring for me but very educational for you.

If you don't have anything of value to contribute you should probably stop quoting people.

I notice that you have a lot of posturing, but absolutely no points. I explained how sweatshops form (exclusively in non-capitalist countries) as well as black markets, if you paid attention, you could even pick up what an "abatement" is by my definition (pssst, it involves forms of force and reducing freedom and can come from anyone) and why it's different from a regulation, which is purely government policy.

And as a bonus, I explained to the other guy how AT&T could not crowd out T-Mobile and Sprint, how oligopolies can't form in capitalist systems, and why Game Theory and specifically Nash's Theories don't apply to capitalism (the Nobel Committee was completely wrong).

...you don't look like you could dispute any of that.

The problem is that you keep focusing on the term 'unabated' but I just used it as more or less of as a synonym for unregulated and unchecked. We can use those terms if that's going to be a problem for you one way or the other.

And sweatshops are literally the product of a company seeking to maximize its profits by minimizing its labor costs as much as possible. That's why they usually formulate in countries with extremely lax labor laws that go unchecked and don't have much -- if any -- constraints at all.

The idea that they are a product of regulation is absolutely hysterical and just more junk perpetuated by mouthbreathing capitalists pretending that unrestrained Reaganomics is the cure for all.

[tribulations]

in other words:
celebrity attorney, recently indicted for alleged extortion of nike, claims without proof that nike paid deandre ayton when he was at arizona

Basically

Sent from my SM-G930F using RealGM mobile app

[Edrees]

He deserved every penny

[righterwriter]

I still don't understand why people care about what brand of shoe a player wears. The shoe doesn't make you play like him.

Go buy the comfortable shoes that don't cost a ridiculous amount of money.

[Gatorade Sax]

The NCAA uses the exact same business model as Nike. Profiting (immensely) off the hard work of kids. It’s already been said, but I too don’t understand how these athletes can’t make money off of their own name before they’re ‘eligible’ to...in 2019.

[Chi Dynasty12]

Can we edit the title? They allegedly paid him. And the person saying it is a criminal.

[dlts20]

Why are we taking news from Creepy Porn Lawyer as if hes relevant. Guy is as sketchy as they come

Exactly, his recent form could land him a job at CNN

Or fox

[6ixSideSniper]

I still don't understand why people care about what brand of shoe a player wears. The shoe doesn't make you play like him.

Go buy the comfortable shoes that don't cost a ridiculous amount of money.

You must killing it in your Wal-mart sneakers.

[righterwriter]

I still don't understand why people care about what brand of shoe a player wears. The shoe doesn't make you play like him.

Go buy the comfortable shoes that don't cost a ridiculous amount of money.

You must killing it in your Wal-mart sneakers.

I am killing it with the extra $100+ I get to keep for every pair of sports shoes I've owned. Ultimately that all adds up to a good chunk of change to use on far more interesting things.

It always makes me a bit sad to see people gushing about their sneakers. "Yo son, check out the fresh new kicks. Looking just like my man Kobe, now! Damn!"

Being a sneaker head is pretty much a sign of being too easily swayed to part with silly amounts of money due to advertising.