"Right now, the country is in a lot of debt. If every pro athlete would cut back on their pay check, they would be able to pay off the debt in no time at all".
That could encompass a lot of people, industry leaders, CEO's, Big Businesses.
What you are seeing is the reality. That just because people have more than they need, does not mean they will share. That is what tax is for.

That being said, its like video games, or cars, or antiques.
Antiques are just old things. An old table is in reality, less worthwhile than a new one. But because people love old stuff, an old one becomes insanely expensive. You can argue that they are nicely designed etc, but the only value, is what people put on it.
If everyone suddenly decided that the copies of where eagles dare, printed before 1970, were must haves, their value would skyrocket. If games were suddenly treated as assets like that, their price would rise.
The point here, is they are paid what people think they are worth. They may not have signed the check, but in going to see sports players, buying their merchandise, watching them on T.V etc, you are giving them money. If less people watched, they would make less money. If more watched, they would get more.
Its called the free market, you cant really change it.

I think most artists make too much money. And if I don't like the 'artists' attitude, I go out of my way to make sure they don't get money. Unfortunately, other people don't do the same, so they continue to make millions.

Sports players are paid to do what they love. They are typically paid way too much.
In my opinion.
But my opinion isn't law.
Its majority rule. And the majority are happy to keep funding their lifestyle.

thenumberone : Very well said! You've definitely made a point.

I don't know why it irritates me...it just does. The biggest problem I have is when they go out and spend their money on frivolous things like a huge house, or a really nice car, or jewelry. It totally changes their lives! If I got paid that much money, you know what would change about my life? Nothing! I'd be a professional athlete, but I'd live in the same house, drive the same car, and I don't need jewelry to make myself look good. That tells me they're throwing their extra, not-needed money away on these big purchases. How can you live in a million square foot house when its just you and your wife and maybe one child? How can you drive a huge Escalade when you don't even have any children?

Some of these athletes get paid $20m or more a year. I could live my whole life easily off of $20m. These guys get that much every 365 days. Just sounds like WAY too much to me.

Money would change me.
In that I would have a decent mortgage free house, a nice car and wouldnt work.
Beyond that, I'd be lucky to make a dent in 3 million. I dont care about jewelry, I dont want to stay in 15 different houses, and I can only drive once car so I dont see a point in buying loads.
Maybe I just lack imagination. I think most of the money would just be spent on food after the initial purchases.
I'd love to have that problem though.

Money talks, that's the fact of life, and if someone was talented enough to play for the best team in the world was offered a huge amount of money then they'll take it. Sure there's a few who'd rather move to another club just for the money, that just shows how greedy they are, and then there's some who'd rather stick with the one club regardless of money.

Looking at football (soccer) for an example; Money is the main thing that drives everything but that money wouldn't be there if television/media wasn't involved to inject money. Before we had televised matches, outside of major events (World Cup, national teams, F.A. Cup final etc), players were paid a decent amount of money a week (around £10,000-£25,000) and when Sky (BSkyB) came in that when the money started to mould everything.
What makes it worse is that fines don't do anything at all; Luis Suarez got fined around 15,000 Swiss Francs, which is basically pocket money for him, and he, like many others, won't care about fines because they can just fling money away as easy as standing up. Lower leagues aren't that able to pay fines, especially on a grassroots level where a red card is a £25 fine and some people can't afford to pay that due to being unemployed or trying to make a living on weekly/monthly work wages while doing other things.

Saying that, most people would love to get paid £75,000+ a week just to kick a ball and play football - It's a dream job, even if you're rubbish and still at a club!

I think they do. I mean, if I ever played a professional sport, it would probably be an NFL punter / kicker. They barely make a million a year if you are average by NFL standards, or up to 3 million a year. Within a few years, I could have a car completely payed off, and a nice little house completely payed off. Within 2 more years, I could have the insurance on both saved up for life. And a couple more would give me enough to put to the side to gather interest so I would be set for life. 
By this math, if I were an NFL punter, I would be set in about 6 or 7 years, and in that time, I could make anywhere from 5 million to 15 million total. If that isn't enough, then what is? 20 million a year? What the heck are you going to do with all that money?!

So yes, I do think that athletes make too much money.

thing1 : Yeah, I agree 100%. In some cases, even the backups are making $1m or $2m. "Oh, I'll just sit the bench all year wearing a backwards baseball cap and carrying around a clipboard."

What is the minimum wage for the NFL? Like $300k? I wish I worked in an organization like that...

thenumberone : How do you go out of your way to make sure artists don't make money?  And are you talking about musician and hip hop artists or people that paint, sculpt, or create visual art?

The money thing is a nice conversation and it dives into free market economy.  Let's take Mike Ilitch, who owns the Detroit Tigers.  He will make, after sales of tv rights and contracts, ticket sales, merchandise sales, food/beer sales at games, and all the money that comes.... What, two billion dollars a year?  More?  Owners make a ton of money.  

So, if a baseball player like Miguel Cabrera is going to get more people to pay money because they want to see him play baseball, why should Miguel Cabrera not get a cut of that two billion dollars?  He generates much more than he gets paid because he has a unique skill and it is in high demand.  

Almost anyone can be a teacher in a public school in the United States.  Most people can bag groceries.  Many can repair cars and build houses.  Fewer can be doctors and dentists and run businesses.  Those folks are more valuable to an economy so they get more money for all the time and effort they spend getting educated and running their businesses.  They have a bigger stake when they have a private doctor's office.  

Baseball players and other sports figure in the entertainment industry (Movie stars, hip hop artists, etc) are in extremely high demand.  There is only one Tom Cruise.  There is only one Kanye West.  Heck, I don't hear anyone complaining about Kim Kardashian who makes millions and millions hand over fist for doing absolutely nothing.  At least athletes train, exercise, and work.

Some say sports athletes are under-valued when it comes to money.  A football player can get hurt in one game, get released, and he sees no more money.  The leagues don't always take care of their people and players are cast aside as soon as they are finished.

I encourage everyone to read about NFL concussions and see the mental and psychological trauma players go through in the game.  Do some reading and see players are still played too much for the entertainment of others while they destroy their bodies.

warmaker :
Well you asked about artists but I'll be more broad.

As I said, if I am unhappy with a well known individual, I use the market like a vote, to express my view.

There was a comedian who dodged a whole lot of tax using offshore accounts (that's an issue which is right in the spotlight here right now). He started by saying he paid what tax he had to and not a penny more, completely unapolegetic. Then, when public opinion turned on him, he suddenly turned repentent (although never paid the tax he ought to have in the begining). I was annoyed about the tax, I was even more annoyed that he was two faced. I used to watch him regularly, but now I turn the channel if he's on, and when he comes to my city during the festival I refuse to go and see him. You can argue how effective this is, because many people forgave him, but im not alone in avoiding him, so he's still feeling the punishment.

Games. If they make a move that I feel screws over the consumer (Even if I'm not one of them, such as platform exclusive dlc, preferential release dates, etc.)I will make sure they get no money for the game. Ergo, I buy it pre owned, or from a re-seller.
Classic examples:
Assasins creed (brotherhood I think). They didnt have time to finish the game for launch, so they cut a chunk out. It even mentions it in the game, saying this is corrupted so we will jump ahead. Ok, they cut corners for launch, I get it. Then they released it as DLC later. paid DLC. Something which was core to the game. And not reasonably priced either.
A 2nd example, Bioshock 2. They had DLC which added multiplayer items such as weapons etc. Fair enough, no problem there. Until it emerged, that dlc is on the disk. You buy the disk, and then they charge you extra for content thats on the disk you bought.
DLC is extra content, and too many companys are creating, and even finishing, DLC before launch opf the actual game. The result is we get a buggy mess of a game (still full price) because they foccussed on DLC, and are expected to pay for content that could have been on the disk.
Its like building a house and planning the extension during the build. If you start the extension during the build, its part of the main build. Otherwise you leave it until the build is mostly finished.

TV programs. A lot of company's, such as AMC, complain about people watching their shows online (where they get no add revenue). But frankly, that is their fault. A lot of networks have shows anywhere from a week, to many months after the USA airing, in other country's. And often most people don't have the channels that regularly show them, meaning they get a slow trickle through over a long period of time. Many networks and analysts have acknowledged that if they want that issue tackled, they should aim to address the issues that cause it. Thats not something that is a deliberate dig at them, but an acknowledgement of it happening.

And as far as artists go, I would simply download there music without paying if it was a singer I hated. But thats not a great example because most artists I hate are from the pop and Rap genre, which I dont lsiten to. I dont really have a means of dealing with them.

As for visual art, if they are in it for the money I'd have to question how its art, since I think art is about expression.
That being said, im pig ignorant about art, I dont really care for it so they dont get much money from me. Thats not because I dont want them to get money, im just not interested.

I agree with most of what you said there, I' throw out that if I had any power to, I would destroy Kanye's income. Hes the kind of 'artist' that ticks me off.

edit-an example of the game thing

Yes.
leBron James is going to get what, 20 million dollars next year? For one reason. That is just insane. And Carmelo Anthony is getting like 21 million. And I make about 500.
Its really not that great.

Barathemos : And even worse than that, I heard Chris Bosh signed a maximum contract with the Heat, which I believe is for 4 years $118 million. Now if my math is right, that is almost $30 million a year! And THAT means he'll be making more than LeBron? A lot more? Am I missing something here? I mean I don't watch basketball very much, but I thought LeBron was currently the best player out there. Doesn't he deserve to make the most? I, I just don't understand what is going on here...

Yeah, I just confirmed it. Chris Bosh is going to make $118 million for the next 4 years. Up to this point in his career, he has made a TOTAL of $123 million. Insane? I think yes...

MattyIce : are you serious? He is getting that much? I just don't know how he will use all that money...

MattyIce : Yeah, I heard about that. The only reason he got that contract is just because he is a big name now. And you know why he is a big name? Because he played with LeBron for 3 years. 

Compared to those who get BIG bucks to those who have true talent, there is a bit of favoritism when it comes to being paid. Like your name in media pays instead of one's skill. But should they all get downgraded? I don't think so.

I think there are many professions which are overpaid.  Athletes are definitely one of them, Actors are another category.

I think some of them get payed too much and I can understand that since they can determine the success that the company or team buying them has. So that could explain all the inflation in their paychecks, however I do think they should impose a tax on the gaining before the yget payed so that they can limit the amount that they gain it can go to a good cause or better pay for other workers of the company that don't get payed well enough. I don't think this should be limited to sports only, but then again it would be really hard to change this because the companies made their way up and probably deserve whatever they are earning. (Though it can be unfair for others)

Why are you complaining? They do their job and you do yours, if the employer wants to pay  their employees 7.50$ an hour then he pays you that, if they want to pay you 1000000$ an hour, then he pays you that. There's nothing really, if anything cops are over payed, they get paid to do what some criminals do for free.