i could go either way on this argument. there has been alot of good arguments.
i think to compare lebron and MJ properly, you have to adjust for teammates, city, general manager, coach, competition
teammates: scotty pippen was so important to MJ's success....... also, highly complementary teammates whereas Lebron's cleveland teams have been either 1) lacking talent (before miami); 2) built a bit like a fantasy team (love, kyries, JR etc.. 3) lacks complementary players (TT is a mediocre big at best with i think character issues)........... cleveland went from best team in league to worst team in league almost all due lebron leaving. think about that.
city: hard to say how it would exactly affect it, but i would assume much greater atmosphere/energy playing in chicago.
general manager/coach: see teammates mostly......... MJ's teams were optimized for he/pippen with great complementary choices (not sure bulls ever really had a traditional PG. very rare). Lebron's teams were/are terribly constructed (might be partly him)
competitors: pretty sure GS and Lebron would beat up Utah pretty badly. i don't think MJ/bulls would be beating GS (before or after durant). in fact, i think they might get killed. prime lakers/celtics, i'm not sure MJ or Lebron would be beating them (obviously everything adjusted for time period)....
look what lebron is doing at this time in his career.. players who were drafted high in his year were darko, carmelo, wade, bosh, kaman etc.. all "over the hill" really badly or gone from the league.
seems to me that if i had a terrible team or a middle-of-the-road team i would take lebron over jordan easily to improve my team. game 7 in the playoffs might be different.
kobe over lebron........ thank you for a nice chuckle