Baseball economics

1. Does a team like the New York Yankees have an obligation to share some of their revenues with other teams that have a weaker economic base The New York Yankees have no obligation to share some of their revenues with other teams that have a weaker economic base. However, with the situation in baseball where small market teams are unable to afford maintaining their teams, there may come a time when very few teams will be able to operate, thus stunting the growth of American baseball and destroying the concept of baseball as the national American sport. To prevent this from happening, the high-revenue teams, along with the Baseball Commission, may want to seriously look into a scheme wherein some revenues are shared by the high revenue teams to help support or subsidize small market teams, as well as institute some form of salary ceiling for the baseball star, in order to prevent the demise of national baseball.
2. Do Bowie Kuhn’s comments reflect a libertarian or utilitarian theory of justice
A libertarian is one who prioritizes individual rights over the welfare of the state, one who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state (AHD, 2000a). On the other hand, utilitarianism is the belief that the value of a thing or an action is determined by its utility or usefulness (AHD, 2000b). Bowie Kuhn’s view is that the introduction of massive cable television broadcasts of baseball will be economically bad for the sport because it will reduce gate receipts and network television revenues, as well a make watching baseball games available to cities without the consent of anybody in baseball management. From the point of view of baseball team owners, who derive revenues from the games, Kuhn’s view is libertarian and anti-utilitarian. It prioritizes the rights of the baseball team owners and those of baseball management. However, from the point of view of baseball fans, it is anti-libertarian because it prioritizes the welfare of a few over those of the general public. From the same point of view, it is also utilitarian because then, what use are the games if those who will be able to watch the games would be limited despite the availability of facilities that will allow access by the general public.
3. If Peter Singer’s proposals where followed, what would be the obligations of major league baseball players to help the poor both within and outside their own country
Peter Singer proposes that each human being has an obligation to assist, and he defines this as follows: if it is in one’s power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of comparable moral significance, one is obligated to do it. By this proposal, major league baseball teams and their highly paid players would have the obligation to help the poor within and outside their own country. Singer’s premise is that, as long as there is no morally and significantly comparable reason for not helping, then there is no excuse not to help. Taking the relatively poorer teams for example, by Singer’s proposal, the high revenue teams would be obligated to help the poorer teams if there is nothing morally comparable that they need to sacrifice in doing so. Highly paid players are also obligated to help their counterpart poor players is there is nothing morally comparable that they need to sacrifice. But what would be debatable is how to determine which is morally comparable or not. Singer also suggests that the particular level of moral significance that one would be willing to sacrifice will vary according to the ethical view that each individual accepts.

References
American Heritage Dictionary. (2000a). Libertarian. Retrieved December 21, 2008, from http://education. yahoo. com/reference/dictionary/entry/libertarian.
American Heritage Dictionary. (2000a). Utilitarianism. Retrieved December 21, 2008, from http://education. yahoo. com/reference/dictionary/entry/utilitarianism.
Greene, J. et al. (n. d.) Baseball economics. Case Resource.
Singer, P. (1990). Rich and poor. Practical Ethics. Case Resource.