If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New Europe)   So how much is a gold medal really worth to an athlete who wins one in Sochi? Well, it turns out you would be better off being Kazakhstani than American or Canadian   (neurope.eu) divider line 6
    More: Ironic, Sochi, Canadians  
•       •       •

8037 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Feb 2014 at 9:00 AM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-02-12 09:04:42 AM
4 votes:
I'd argue the contrary: endorsement contracts would outpay just about any national reward, and those tend to be pretty lucrative in the US.
2014-02-12 10:36:34 AM
2 votes:

Nine Hundred and Eight: Pangea: Z-clipped: I'm fine with countries giving athletes grants for training to encourage participation in the Olympics, but cash rewards for medals are bullshiat. They go against the entire idea of the Games.

You're not getting paid for the Olympics until after you've won a medal. So you're still an amateur until that point.

The idea of someone remaining an amateur after they've proven themselves to be one of the 3 best athletes IN THE WORLD, for a given sport is patently absurd.

You have ascended to the next level once you stand on that podium. Stop hatin'.

The amateur thing is no longer a rule for competing in the Olympics and has not been for a while.


It's not so much about amatueurism. It's about pushing the boundaries of human physical achievement, for its own sake. I think that a goal that noble (for lack of a better word) is cheapened by dangling a monetary carrot in front of it.

Like I said, paying people to train and compete? Fine with me. Athletes need to eat. But paying them to win as if the respect and recognition of their being the fastest, strongest, most-skilled etc. human in the world isn't reward enough? Lame.
2014-02-12 09:07:23 AM
2 votes:
I'm fine with countries giving athletes grants for training to encourage participation in the Olympics, but cash rewards for medals are bullshiat. They go against the entire idea of the Games.
2014-02-12 03:02:57 PM
1 votes:

AliceBToklasLives: Z-clipped: AliceBToklasLives: Z-clipped: I'm fine with countries giving athletes grants for training to encourage participation in the Olympics, but cash rewards for medals are bullshiat. They go against the entire idea of the Games.

It does go against the entire ideal of the Olympics, which is amateurism. According to that ideal, only folks who are independently wealthy should compete in sports. 'Mechanical men' (or manual laborers - those who work with their hands) are not part of the club. It is for the rich, not those dirty cheating masses. So yeah, uh, fark the Olympic ideal

See my above comment.

Meh. The ideal is still elitist. Success should be rewarded financially, esp. by capitalist societies.


First of all, there's no such thing as a "capitalist society". Capitalism is an economic system, not a social one. Second, the US is not a capitalist economy except in the minds of some deluded folks. Third, the idea of a government "rewarding" athletes for success in the Olympics is completely antithetical to capitalism. My suggestion (paying for participation) is far more in line with capitalist policy than what you're suggesting.
2014-02-12 09:37:13 AM
1 votes:
Endorsement deals will only last so long. If an athlete is smart they can parley that into a post olympic career, like Bruce Jenner...........nevermind.
2014-02-12 09:31:10 AM
1 votes:
Wait, they get paid for getting gold?
That seems kind of... unsportsmanly.

Huh.
 
Displayed 6 of 6 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report