Athletes are paid higher salaries than teachers because they serve to maintain the status quo

Taking Up Folding Chairs.I did not 'concede' SQ as my opponent claims, but rather I've decided to argue under the hypothetical that the status is what my opponent defines it to be (redundant given the definition of SQ). I more or less still have the capacity to argue what constitutes the current status quo. I choose not to. The trench I've dug says: "[Even] if the status quo is SQ, [blahblahblah]". My opponent has not forwarded arguments in favor of SQ. I haven't done so against it. Let's leave it at that and resume the debate.Paying the Doctor Who Doesn't Know What Money Is.An arching point to this debate is: are teachers more influential to maintaining SQ than athletes? I've explained how teachers maintain SQ and I will do so again. Teachers are important, even necessary, to establishing the indoctrinating framework to each successive generation in order for the generation to functionally accept, implement and promote SQ. My opponent does not dispute this argument. Without teachers, there would be no SQ. With athletes, however, SQ exists with or without them. Thus, the extreme necessity of teachers in maintaining SQ is, by itself, sufficient to showing their greater influence in terms of SQ.Relevant Rebuttals - En Garde!PRO: Some questions worth asking...CON: These are rhetorical questions that are irrelevant to the resolution (along with those further down the line). You might as well ask: "Are teachers athletes?" The short answer is no. Teachers are not athletes, and don't have to perpetrate maintenance of SQ the way athletes do. This is, however beside the point. Even if we assume that athletes perpetrate SQ, there is no hard indicative that the negative nature of this SQ is what is intended. Again, my opponent cannot read minds and is only able to make some haphazard inductive guess at whether or not SQ maintenance is an intention. As I've explained (and my opponent agrees as being circular), profit and S&D explain athletes' wages. Moreover, I've shown that profit and S&D are empirically and inductively significant enough to be able to serve as the entire explanation to athletes' wages. Anything else is simply overshadowed and insignificant. Since profit can act as a sole incentive, any other incentive cannot be more than a conspiratorial guess.ClassismTeachers, the ones who are responsible for indoctrinative principles, necessarily maintain classism more than pro athletes.Again, S&D. There is a demand for athletics and competition outside of classist/capitalist trappings. Is it unreasonable to train our focus on those able to perform feats of skill? People are also inherently materialistic. Even you, PRO, have to admit that you desire certain unnecessary things (TV, car, house, wife/husband, etc.). That's materialism. How do you know your materialism is caused by someone else's desire to maintain SQ? You don't. It's a sheer assertion. Nothing more.CompetitionNot related to whether or not something intends SQ.Self-serving NarcissismSo athletes can be narcissistic. So? How does this correlate in terms of the resolution? People generally favor the players of more likeable bearing; the humble players[3][4]. Arrogant athletes are derogatorily termed "cocky"[1][2] and are generally disfavored by a good number of people. Even you, PRO, serve as an example of the general attitude of dislike toward arrogance & narcissism. So how in the world does this affect SQ negatively if SQ disfavors narcissism? The concept of SQ itself is contradictory in nature.Even if narcissism does negatively spread SQ significantly among the masses due to some cocky sports players, there is no link to intended causation. Intent and results are not the same. I will repeat that as many times as I need to.Pro: "students are often allowed and encouraged to put sports ahead of their education"By P.E. teachers.. Pro: "especially if talented"As mentioned before, humanity naturally demands athletics (occurs outside of SQ).MarketingManifestation. Not an indicative of intent.EscapismPRO:"a true escape (distraction) from the reality of health care, the economy and war"Because we have so much sports that it consumes enough time for us to not even function as human beings. Right.Why capitalist ideology was developed:Pro: "Those who provide escapism are highly valued for their ability to veil the unequal distribution of resources from the masses."Obviously the dirt-poor serfs who began the mechanisms of mercantilism[6] did so in order to serve to maintain a classist, self-serving, narcissistic capitalism (which didn’t exist by the way). I mean, they’ve obviously predicted all the outcomes of capitalism and intended for sports 600 years in the future to have some forms of classist trappings. I apologize for the sarcasm, but your assertion of capitalist practices done in order to serve capitalist maintenance is simply ridiculous.Pro: "athletes’ and sports’ perceived effect..intended effect"The intended effect of commercialized athletics is to make money off of people's natural demand for athletics (profit incentive is conceded as circular). There is no evidence otherwise. Perceived effects, used as evidence, is not the same as the intent behind the effect (again, serfs and mercantilism). PRO: "SQ itemized earlier in response."Right. Serfs itemized SQ before SQ existed when they started mercantilistic practices. It totally wasn't considered a way to better efficient specialization. Ironic because english society rid itself of the extremely classist feudalism with agrarian capitalism.[6]No Peace Treaties were Signed that Day.My opponent concedes S&D and the profit incentive (in that order). I've conceded nothing, and in fact have shown that profit and S&D are far more inductively likely than my opponent's blank assertions of intent.My opponent then proceeds to claim to know that SQ is first established with the very intent to maintain SQ (results of capitalism). Again, early agrarian society probably didn't have capitalist-founding seers who, for some twisted reason, decided to help some future class of people spread classism.My opponent's case in favor of athlete's serving to maintain SQ more so than teachers will be weighed more thoroughly in the final round. I believe teachers to have been shown to be more significant in this area.[1] http://www.rantsports.com...;[2] http://www.complex.com...;[3] http://www.rantsports.com...;[4] http://coverground.co...;[5] http://education-portal.com...;[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...;