Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 400 posts

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#381

Post by [deleted] »

atwrk wrote: post #352
jalapenos wrote: post #112

Earlier 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…

That's all purely a social construct - e.g. almost nobody on the planet outside the US watches football (or Cricket in the UK/India, or ...). Football is a thing in the US because it is a thing in the US: You can bond with your peers around it. The objective technicalities of the sport itself have nothing to do with it.

[deleted]

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#383

Post by rat87 »

electrozav wrote: post #183
llamaimperative wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but that's because they're wrong. Consider the counterfactual. In order for it to be true that many people are paid for work that isn't valuable, it'd have to be true that many people are willingly parting with their money for no reason at all. That does happen, of course, and it's so special we think highly of people when they do it (it's called charity). Just because people can't reason about the transmission…

There are many cases of market failure and inefficiencies, rentiers, useless 'BS jobs' and unchecked monopolies in a market economy. Why would the people criticizing it be wrong? It's not like it's rare. A landlord or a holder of IP can and will arrange deals that have negative value for society because of the fact it attracts monetary value for them. A client paying for a service, is this done 'willingly' when it is…

I think the concept of BS jobs is BS. That's because the fulfillment people get from jobs isn't tied to the value the economic value they provide to the firm or even the social value they may or may not provide. Some people may hate teaching because they feel it is soul crushing to them (especially if they are not supported and the school isn't in good shape) despite it being socially useful someone else may enjoy being an elderly greeter because it lets them continue working and they may feel they are providing some social value even if most people don't care another person may be happy working at the shrinkwrap factory because it provides money for their family

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#384

Post by viraptor »

echoangle wrote: post #361
viraptor wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a fencing example specifically, but in Poland skijumping effectively didn't exist until 2001. Then because of Adam Małysz, a record viewership has been established for national TV - during skijumping championships. That record has not been replaced until at least 2022 (I don't have more recent data, maybe it still stands). The largest football matches had millions fewer people watching. For more context the 10 mo…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_in_Poland#Viewing_s... There are 6 football games with higher viewership than the 2002 Olympic ski jumping. Also, viewers per year would be a better metric, one single event with a lot of viewer probably gives you less ad revenue than an event every week with half the viewers.

https://www.wirtualnemedia.pl/m/artykul/hity-telewizyjne-his...

They're looking at a different set of TV stations.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#385

Post by johnea »

Maybe they should make porn an olympic event?

It wouldn't be the stupedist, and some forms are probably pretty physically demanding (can't really comment based on first person experience since I don't view it).

Personally, I find the whole competitive sports industry to be a giant waste of time and money.

For poelpe practicing the sports, most probably bring physical benefits. For the 99.999% who just watch it on TV, what's the point really?

If someone likes sports, they should go out and play them...

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#386

Post by lmm »

The_Colonel wrote: post #374
lmm wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's quite that limited. Basketball is pretty much worldwide, so is tennis (and golf, up to a point at least). Cricket is played in a minority of countries, but those countries are scattered across the world so it's not exactly "regional".

> Basketball is pretty much worldwide Is it played worldwide? Sure, but so is volleyball. It's certainly not a culturally significant sport everywhere. I think my country has a basketball league, but I don't know literally anything about it. The only player I can recall the name of is Michael Jordan. > is tennis (and golf, up to a point at least) Both are sports for rich (countries) only. How many tennis players you…

> so is volleyball

Is it? I've never played volleyball and I never met anyone who had until I moved to my current country.

> Both are sports for rich (countries) only. How many tennis players you know are from Africa?

Fair, but that's a little different from "regional".

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#388

Post by khafra »

ImJamal wrote: post #373
khafra wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI would have an expense comparable to the entire current welfare state, which is a large part of the federal budget even in America--much larger than defense spending, for example. However, GDP keeps going up, and many people would argue that "real" labor force participation keeps going down (e.g., bullshit service sector jobs, which mostly provide value to customers who want to feel superior to someone). At some p…

You can't replace most of the current welfare state since you are ultimately going to have to provide food, medical and housing payments directly because people will blow all their UBI and not have those things. Unless you are willing to let people starve to death since they wasted their money you will end up with both systems.

Ok, you're guessing that current welfare recipients are uniformly imprudent and lack all virtue, rather than having some sizeable minority who are simply temporarily down on their luck. Let's grant your assumption, for the sake of this argument.

The biggest parts of the federal welfare budget by far are social security and medicare/medicaid. SS is simply a QBI, a UBI which is for qualified recipient instead of universal. So that's $1.4T saved, right there.

Medicare/Medicaid together are another $1.4T, and replacing them isn't automatic--a UBI high enough to cover contemporary American medical costs would be huge. I must note, though, that these exorbitant medical costs are being collectively paid by Americans anyway; if we switched to literally any other system--from Robin Hanson's "buy life insurance and medical care from the same company" to EU-style public/private insurance--we'd save enough for UBI from that alone.

The rest of welfare is comparitively penny-ante stuff--food stamps are only $120B, section 8 housing is $70B, etc. Even if we still had to provide Guaranteed Basic Food and Guaranteed Basic Housing in addition to UBI, it could still end up cheaper than our current system.

And even if it didn't, I stand by my observation that the GDP keeps going up. If we genuinely can't afford a UBI at a GDP of 27T, what about at 30T? That increase covers the entirety of the current spending on both social security and medical aid. If not at 30T, what about at 40T or 50T?

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#389

Post by josephcsible »

Y-bar wrote: post #65
themaninthedark wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to provide liveable wages for both artists and athletes. Who gets to choose which artists and athletes are funded? When do we start funding them? In high-school, before? After they graduate? There are many people who identify as athletes at that age, football players, cheerleaders. I have a 6yo son who is really good at doing various crafts and he really enjoys it, does he count as an artist? How do we d…

> Who gets to choose which artists and athletes are funded? Preferably via UBI which would prevent cheating and inconsistencies and minimise the bureaucracy around it. > When do we start funding them? Smarter people than me have already answered this, but generally at 18 years of age or after graduation seems to be a common answer. > I have a 6yo son who is really good at doing various crafts and he really enjoys it,…

UBI sounds good on paper, and I was in favor of replacing the rest of our safety nets with it until 2019. The problem is, after trying it, as happened in lots of different places during the COVID lockdowns, way too many people will decide to live off of it alone while doing absolutely nothing useful.

Re: Olympians turn to OnlyFans to fund dreams due to 'broken' finance system (2024)

#390

Post by prmoustache »

The_Colonel wrote: post #374
lmm wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's quite that limited. Basketball is pretty much worldwide, so is tennis (and golf, up to a point at least). Cricket is played in a minority of countries, but those countries are scattered across the world so it's not exactly "regional".

> Basketball is pretty much worldwide Is it played worldwide? Sure, but so is volleyball. It's certainly not a culturally significant sport everywhere. I think my country has a basketball league, but I don't know literally anything about it. The only player I can recall the name of is Michael Jordan. > is tennis (and golf, up to a point at least) Both are sports for rich (countries) only. How many tennis players you…

> Both are sports for rich (countries) only. How many tennis players you know are from Africa?

I don't think this matter.

Most people have ever heard of at least one of the grand slam Tennis tournament that happens every year: Wimbledon, US Open, Rolland Garros or Australian Open. Same for Golf, in my case I can name the British and US Open. In cycling, most people not even interested in it can name the Tour de France. Everyone knows the NBA basketball league, the Soccer World Cup and a number of majors teams from the UEFA and/or their own continent.

Volleyball? I don't think there is any major tournament broadcasted and advertised all over the world. You only really hear about it during olympics alongside a number of other collective and individual sports.

Post reply on HN