My solution for the economy.

Give IT Professionals a Big Pay Raise
Written by John Bailo

Over the past decade we've been treated to vociferous arguments about the misdistribution of goods and assets in our society. The approaches for rectifying this situation focus on the extremes. Boost minimum wages? Add taxes on the wealthy? These answers overlook a third way: doubling the incomes of STEM workers.

http://www.internetevolution.com/author.…

RE: NFL Tax Exempt Status. Here's a petition to revoke . . . http://www.change.org/NFLnonprofit

I read that story as indicating a trend away from chimp research, not (sadly) animal research in general.

Fuck shit stack!

I knew a former semi-professional figure skater in college who was a lovely person but had a sort of sheepish aversion to talking about sexuality. It's so much like ballet in that it's a highly rigorous sport/dance/practice started prepubescently and also being dominated by quintessentially conservative and aristocratic (graceful men) social conventions.

It is not as if the NFL has special tax-exempt status. They are a non-profit just like every other non-profit. They do not make profits, all the profits go to the 32 teams where it is taxed. It is a trade organization that runs off of dues paid by its members, like every other trade organization.

It uses these funds to negotiate contracts, pay referees, conduct safety training/testing, and for benefits for players, and of course pay salaries of workers.

This has been explained many times, so I am unsure why The Stranger refuses to be honest about the topic, or at least (god forbid) find out how it actually works.

http://rosterwatch.com/marshawn-lynch-im…

@5 Yes. Though, I have to wonder how many Non-Profit CEO's are making $29.5 million as of 2011?

@5 non-profits should be doing public good. By definition a trade association for football should be promoting football in general, not just the NFL. But you're correct, they're not deducting anything and the profits go to the for-profit teams. I doubt the taxpayers would see a noticeable difference.

@8
Football teams get to reduce their taxes by writing off the millions they pay in dues.

It's like when Barbara Bush donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Jeb Bush's education company after Hurricane Katrina--you knew she was just laundering her money.

Speaking of the NFL, a Raiderette filed a lawsuit a couple of weeks ago against the Oakland Raiders for unfair labor practices--unpaid practices, required payments for costumes, make-artists and hairstylists, fines for violations, and other things meant that the cheerleaders were getting less than $5 an hour. I have no idea how the Seahawks treat their cheerleaders, but what the Raiders were doing is apparently common practice among NFL teams. Anyway, most of this was in a story a couple of weeks ago. Here's an article from today:

http://www.sfgate.com/raiders/article/Ra…

@10: The rationale for how cheerleaders are compensated is basically:

A) this is nowhere near a full-time job, and since it is a seasonal job with not many hours, no one should be trying to support themselves or a family on it.

B) it is more about "exposure" for the women, and they treat it as a hobby more than anything.

Shitty reasons, huh? Strange thing is that it appears many of the women involved tend to agree with the this take on it, publicly at least. Part of it is that the job itself is not very demanding, and many cheerleaders also get a cut out of promotional items/merchandise, such as the Dallas cheeleader's calendar. However, these will all vary from team to team.

Personally, I think the reasoning is insanely bad, but I am not sure if it is an NFL issue, or an issue with individual teams. I would imagine it is about the team itself, as I do not think there is a union for cheerleaders, nor and NFL rules regarding their compensation or working conditions.

It is some shameful shit though, and I am glad someone is finally suing about it. Surprised it has not come up sooner, honestly.

@7-9:
I have no issue with revising the rules regarding trade organizations and taxes in general, but it is not good practice to draft a law that targets one trade organization just because it is a very lucrative trade that a lot of people do not find important. Close loopholes if necessary, institute caps, but do not single out one group for legally arbitrary reasons.

The NFL does support football in other countries, and does do a lot amount of charity work/awareness raising. The "Play 60" initiative is a big one now. So it does operate for the public good, if we are going to be honest about it and shed our "sports are evil" biases.

@9 I suspect the teams could write it off as a business expense anyway. But I don't know.

@12 good info. I'm not biased in this issue, just think all for-profit organizations (which the NFL obviously is) should pay appropriate taxes. I'm not convinced they're not now, so I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. And its worth noting that revoking this loophole would also affect the NHL; other professional leagues are not non-profit.