What's the message of this ad? "Say yes to more debt- and respond to the extension of credit by doing a stupid dance as if you've just won something valuable!"
Some people wear their hearts on their sleeves. The actors in NetCredit commercials wear their FICA scores on their t-shirts. And those scores are not Exceptional. They are in the "Fair" range. If they are being approved for loans, those interest rates are high- but let's ignore that, because all that really matters is that NetCredit is going to let you spend some more. In real life, this is not good news. In NetCredit ads, the actors celebrate because they have the opportunity to dig that debt hole just a little bit deeper.
Isn't that a baby stroller? That kid is in trouble. He chose his parents wrong. His parents are frivolous morons.
And I'm not even talking about the AI-generated "actors" being used to sell this life-ruining addiction. I'm talking about the actual concept of "Futures Markets."
What's fake? The idea that gambling is the road to financial security, let alone "innocent fun" that adds "adventure" to watching sports. Unless financial stress is fun. Unless being suddenly unable to pay bills is fun. Unless being addicted to constant doses of dopamine generated by taking one stupid risk after another is fun.
None of this is real, but all of it is currently dominating commercial television, especially during any sports coverage. ESPN's funding is coming almost exclusively from gambling (and yes, "futures markets" is GAMBLING.) At this point, I'm not even sure that sports coverage would even exist without the billions of dollars in ad revenue from online gambling. Pre-game shows certainly would not exist; they are nothing more than long-form commercials for gambling apps.
Some of you are in big trouble, and I really hope that you manage to see that 1-800-Gambling notice on your screens and use it to get help. Because none of this is real, and all of it is dangerous.
A group of old, rugged veteran fishermen are entertaining themselves with stories of conquests on the sea when they are interrupted by a twerp who regales them with the tale of how he made a lot of money sitting on his ass, staring at his phone. The fishermen were out in nature's fury, risking the elements. The twerp was sitting at a bar, risking his rent money.
And he won so much, he's treating the entire place to breakfast. Well, that's something, I guess. It still doesn't dissuade me from my belief that society has gone to hell in a handbasket and there's no bringing it back.
You know, I imagine winning a lot of money on a bet is probably pretty "thrilling." Of course, as in every case where the possibility of a thrill is involved, a required ingredient is the possibility of massive, horrific failure. Overcoming the odds, surviving the danger- that's where the thrill comes from, or it doesn't exist.
For every gambler who enjoys the thrill of winning money, a hundred experience the other emotion- depression and guilt at once again giving in to an addiction and throwing away money they simply could not afford to lose. (And don't come at me with "most people only gamble money they can afford to lose, and FanDuel, etc. actually provide public service blurbs in tiny handwriting reminding people only to gamble what they can afford to lose. Gambling money that doesn't mean anything to you is like experiencing the kiddie ride at your local amusement park. No risk felt= no chance for a thrill. You can't have it both ways.)
And by using the nonsense phrase "Thrillionaire," FanDuel is trying to sell the idea that you can actually become quite rich with this Just for Fun Harmless Amusement involving risking your hard-earned money (but only an amount you can afford to lose, not that you'll lose because come on don't you believe in yourself and your destiny to be a Thrillionaire?) They give us a goofy scene where people are being goofy and which resembles that forementioned amusement park because look a guy is riding around in a bumper car. He's just being a kid playing a game- a game that involves risk, and that feeds a life-destroying addiction, but take a chill pill look how much fun he's having!
I'll continue to pass. I work too hard and, oddly enough, I manage to enjoy sports even without putting cash at risk. I'm weird that way.
It was during my first year as a scorer of APUSH essays in 2008 that I really fell in love with Minor League Baseball. That year- and for seven more years afterwards- the scoring was in the Kentucky Convention Center in Louisville, and at least three evenings during the week of grading I would wander down the River Walk and drop $5 to watch a few innings of the Bats v. the Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs, the Toledo Mud Hens, the Pawtucket Red Sox, etc. The atmosphere was (almost) always great and they even welcomed us Readers on the scoreboard. Perfect way to unwind after eight hours of scoring essays.
But every once in a while, one of those beautiful nights at Bats Stadium included the unctuous "Bark at the Park" ritual. Not being a dog owner, I'm never going to appreciate the attraction of taking a dog to a baseball game. And it didn't help that the food special was $1 hot dogs because they were (yuck) boiled, which should be a war crime.
*As I prepare for a third straight year in Kansas City- where, again, the Royals will be on the road and there is no minor league team available to spend an evening enjoying- ChatGBT is giving me a glimmer of hope, predicting that after a decade of exile we APUSH Readers may well be welcomed back to Louisville in 2027. If that's really a possibility, I take back anything bad I've ever said about Bark at the Park. I'll put up with the dogs if I can get the Bats back.
I have one goal in life, and it's to be half as happy about anything as this woman is about carrying frozen desserts fifteen feet to place in front of customers too damn lazy and entitled to just pick it up themselves despite the booth being managed by exactly one person.
Seriously, I can't be the only person who wants to slap that stupid grin off that stupid face. Get over yourself, lady. You're a grown woman serving flavored ice at a swimming pool. There's no way you thought that this is what you were going to be doing ten years ago, when you were a Medieval Art Major at State University.
Know how sometimes you can just read the thumbnail and accurately predict what the majority of comments will focus on? That never works better than with with videos listing banned toys.
Every single time I check out one of these videos listing toys that were briefly popular in the 1960s and 70s but were finally banned because they maimed or murdered children, I know I can scroll down through the comments and read an endless barrage of "I had one of these and turned out fine," "Stupid kids ruined this for everyone," and "woke helicopter parents raise soft kids today" rants. One Boomer after another waxing poetic about how he used to throw Lawn Jarts, have BB-gun wars with neighbors, set off M-80s to add a little adventure to his Green Army Men battles and- of course- drink out of the garden hose because that's what Every Single Person Above the Age of 60 Remembers Better Than Anything Else.
And of course they did all this with No Parental Supervision Whatsoever- hell, most of them grew up with out parents at all. They walked miles to school every day and were never accosted, molested, or otherwise bothered by passing strangers because they didn't exist. They rode bikes without helmets because helmets are Totally Woke and crashed all the time and as previously mentioned, they turned out Just Fine.* And I strongly suspect that they lament the days before seatbelts ruined the traveling experience and turned the Later, Lesser Generations into Pathetic Crystal Snowflakes who Demand Participation Trophies.
If these posters were honest, they'd admit that they don't really miss those stupid dangerous toys (some of which I actually possessed at some point- I especially remember my Creepy Thing Maker and burning my fingers on the hot wax from time to time.) They just miss being young- so much so that they fail to notice- or are unwilling to concede- that kids today are far better off living in a society that doesn't pitch dangerous "fun" activities to parents. Seatbelts, bike helmets, and toys that don't send spikes into our heads or missiles into our mouth don't diminish childhood. The cartoons are infinitely better too- people my age grew up with characters who seemed more interested in inflicting pain on each other- Tom and Jerry, Bugs and Daffy, Sylvester and Tweety, Road Runner and Coyote- than having fun. Today's kids have Bluey, Paw Patrol, Big City Greens, Spidey and Friends, Pupstruction, etc. etc. etc.- each of which tell good stories with healthy, positive messages (which these Boomers, I'm sure, consider both Woke and Gay.)
*did they really grow up "just fine?" I mean, they are constantly ranting about kids today growing up encased in bubble-wrap and pumping their chests about how much Tougher today's older people are because they were "allowed" to grow up feral and basically raise themselves. I don't think there's anything particularly healthy about people my age complaining that kids aren't getting hurt as much today as they did Back in the Good Old Days.
