Could they unionize?
Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
331–340 of 400 posts
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#332System working as designed? Like, if your hobby is throwing a disc as far as you can, have fun. But don't expect many people to pay to watch right? But people pay a whole lot to see nice bodies doing sexual stuff. So since money comes from what other people value, no need for a surprised Pikachu face.
A few years ago, I remember when the Olympics was hosted in Vancouver, BC. The news reported that an insane amount of free condoms was distributed to the athletes. Some lower level athletes were interviewed, and they said they knew they had zero chance of a medal, but were having the time of their lives.
This always gets the pearl-clutchers out of the woodwork - you're gathering a few hundred of the world's fittest people in peak performance mode in the same place for a few weeks, giving most of them a huge amount of downtime, what do you THINK is going to happen? (This is the general 'you', not YOU)
Providing free access to make sure things are happening safely is not what's 'encouraging the behaviour' here :D
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you say sounds logical, but it's nevertheless observably obviously wrong, and that's what's important. All the figures bear out that people find football more entertaining than extreme feats. Maybe they like the slow pace and tension as it's more relatable to their own lives, or because the lulls in action allow some socializing or whatever. Otherwise they'd spend their weekends watching hours of shark wrestling…
Or, hear me out, it's purely a cultural thing. Some communities are into hockey, wrestling, soccer, football etc. You could say the same thing about ski jumping, yet it's extremely popular in a few EU countries and pretty well funded. AFAIU barely anyone gave a shit about gymnastics in the US before Biles - if we have pipelines for young athletes to succeed, their sports can absolutely become regionally popular, suff…
Another example of this was chess with Bobby Fischer. Before Fischer there was minimal interest in chess on the US. But he caused a 3000%+ increase in membership of the US Chess Federation, to say nothing of casual players, and is largely responsible for the growth of chess in the US.
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you seriously think that there is even a tiny chance of fencing ever continuously bringing in even half as much viewers as football, I don't know what to tell you. The uncertainty there is not weather report level, more like "the sun will rise tomorrow".
As a counterpoint, I bet if you had told people a thousand years ago that swordsmanship would be less interesting to people than kicking a ball, they would also think you were crazy.
People would love to see gladiators hack each other to death in an arena, even today. But modern fencing is far from the same thing.
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#335Funny how "not getting paid" went from being a requirement [1] to being a scandal.
Maybe, the government could make an agency that will employ them all and pay them a wage. Of course, it would only be fair that, if all the downside is taken up by the agency, then it will also get all the upside. Meaning: If any agency athlete starts raking in millions in sponsorship deals, then those millions will go to the agency, and the athlete will keep getting no more than their salary.
Or is "privatize profits, socialize losses" the place where entitlement culture is actually at, right now?
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Games#Amateurism_and...
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you say sounds logical, but it's nevertheless observably obviously wrong, and that's what's important. All the figures bear out that people find football more entertaining than extreme feats. Maybe they like the slow pace and tension as it's more relatable to their own lives, or because the lulls in action allow some socializing or whatever. Otherwise they'd spend their weekends watching hours of shark wrestling…
Or, hear me out, it's purely a cultural thing. Some communities are into hockey, wrestling, soccer, football etc. You could say the same thing about ski jumping, yet it's extremely popular in a few EU countries and pretty well funded. AFAIU barely anyone gave a shit about gymnastics in the US before Biles - if we have pipelines for young athletes to succeed, their sports can absolutely become regionally popular, suff…
It can change really quickly too, with the top contenders coming from new countries. For example Polish population changed in 2001 from "what's skijumping?" to "skijumping is the new national sport" just because Adam Małysz won many medals and has a fun personality.
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fencing as done now looks legit stupid, so does racewalking. Javelin, while slightly more cool, is you throwing a stick. Mildly interesting for a few seconds. Football is a top tier sport because it's entertaining. People will pay to see it. Hence there's money to be earned. If someone wants to spend their time seeing how far they can throw a stick, cool, but they shouldn't be surprised they're waking up to an empty…
What looks stupid and cool is purely subjective. Fencing is hard to follow because its fast and movements are subtle. > If someone wants to spend their time seeing how far they can throw a stick, cool, but they shouldn't be surprised they're waking up to an empty bank account every day. But if someone wants to see how well they can kick a ball its somehow worth paying them? The biggest factor here is that team sports…
> Fencing is hard to follow because its fast and movements are subtle.
Which, if anything, is great a case for instant replay and slo-mo.
Football is often also quite hard to follow, but it brings in so much money that we've just solved that problem with technology.
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#338System working as designed? Like, if your hobby is throwing a disc as far as you can, have fun. But don't expect many people to pay to watch right? But people pay a whole lot to see nice bodies doing sexual stuff. So since money comes from what other people value, no need for a surprised Pikachu face.
> if your hobby "Olympians" representing their countries. - Is your hobby "to create software"? Then you should not be paid for it. - Do you like to help peolpe? Then you should not be paid for being a doctor. - etc. Who should earn all the money then? The owners of the TV stations, the owners of the hospitals, basically the people that does nothing and just own things. What a dystopia of a world are we creating.
> "Olympians" representing their countries.
Maybe. But they don't represent the people in their countries. Paying them is not a matter of taxation, I don't care about watching sports (but I do sports) and I never watch, I don't see myself represented in any way and I am not willing to pay for the "honor" or being "represented". In the end the article is about money: who should pay, why, how much? Not the tax payer.
Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#339Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
There isn't any mention of socialism, or anything related to it in your link. It sounds like a classic balance of payments issue (importing too much compared to exports/tourism/other revenues) being hit with an exploding in price critical import (oil). Sri Lanka had the same issues just a few years back, was it "socialism" too?
India until 1991 was very socialist. After 1991 they implemented reforms to reduce state controls. This [0] explains a bit better [0] https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/india-and-the-tragedy-of-soci...
What a shittily written article, staining the Adam Smith name.
Nationalising a bunch of critical industries isn't "socialism" and the article utterly fails to explain how it is or why it's related. Historical UK, and modern France, Russia, UAE, Saudi Arabia also had multiple crucial industries which were fully nationally owned. Were they socialist too?