Sport is big business. Olympic champions, hosting the World Cup, sponsoring an athlete to wear a branded piece of apparel, and such like, can have huge economic implications for a region, country or firm. The stakes are high so it stands to reason that winning becomes a be all in itself. Isn’t consuming an energy gel and having a blood transfusion to enhance performance ultimately an extension of the same behaviour? The motivation is obvious but surely consumption of performance enhancing substances is a form of cheating? Is this wrong? A sporting event is above all else a spectacle. If it wasn’t what would drive the financing? Therefore anything that enhances performance and therefore the utility of the audience should be encouraged. The economics would suggest so. What do you think?
a price to pay the doping dilemma speedo testing of little use in the future no advantages lance armstrong why is marijuana banned? i want to be entertained
econ2day 