Outlaw83
1yr ago
1.) If you ask the median person, whether they'd want a scenario where every ticket was $150, or there was a chance they had to pay $190, but somebody on the same row as them got to pay $110, they'd absolutely despise it. People despise surge pricing, even if there's a somewhat better argument for it. People want stability and firm prices, not basically having to roll a dice every time they try to make any purchase.
Ironically, both libertarians and socialists at the ends of the economic chart think people should be nothing but economic input and output machines, and don't like it when human beings act differently.
2.) The difference with hotel & plane prices is the time dynamic - when two people buying a ticket on the same row, at the same time, can see a different price, that's when people get pissed, and the reason hotels and flights get away with it is twofold - there's less feelings connected to a plane flight and more importantly, there's not thousands of people trying to get the same flight at the same time.
3.) Why do artists care? Because contrary to popular contrarian opinion, not all famous people are unfeeling sociopaths hell bent on screwing over as many people as possible. But, even looking at things selfishly, artists understand that to an extent, having only an audience that can afford insane ticket prices will be a less hyped audience than people for whom this is basically the high point of their lives, as opposed to somebody more focused on being an influencer in the first row or whatever. But also though, many artists probably have memories of being unable to afford tickets to the people they liked, and want the ability for many types of their fans to able to get into a show.
4.) The combination of basically automated scalping + Ticketmaster's pointless fees + their monopoly of tickets plus stadiums is what really upsets people. If somebody waits in line for 12 hours to get the first tickets, then sells them, people may not like it, but they can respect it. They have zero respect for some dork who wrote some code so they can buy 8 zillion tickets on the first day.
I joke, but only halfway that if Biden came out tomorrow and said he was starting anti-trust action into breaking up Ticketmaster/Livenation and pushing regulatory rules to limit fees, he'd gain ten points in approval overnight. Donald Trump would beat Ticketmaster in an election in even deep blue states.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
I mean, what you listed, with some modifications, was working, and most people were fine with. The issue is, now those nosebleeds are $300 with another $100 of "fees" tacked on, if you can get to the tickets before some scalper buys 5,000 seats from his basement.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Side note - the reason why they have the contracts w/ labels and artists is since their merger with LiveNation/AEG, they also own many of the biggest and most important stadiums as well.
Ticketmaster was always crappy, but once they merged with LiveNation, and there was no way for artists who wanted too, like Pearl Jam, to push back reliably, they really went into overdrive w/ the BS fees and pushing up prices. This is just one example - Bruce Springsteen is having a tour early next year. Now, of course, these tickets aren't going to be cheap.
But, in Europe, from what I saw, prices ranged from $50 to $200, while in the US, seats went from $100-$150 for the nosebleeds to literal thousands for the floor. Now, there's not that much of an economic difference or interest difference between the two areas when it comes to Springsteen, so that's where people getting upset kicks in.
It also doesn't help people's trust in TM/LN when they also own a third-party ticket selling site.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
In a world of 750 million people (Europe + US + Canada) that's supposedly dominated by wokeness, there are going to be enough businesses for the 'man bites dog' story of 'we're not hiring white dudes' story to pop up as much as people interested in that story wants, even if 95% of businesses are hiring relatively meritocratically, putting aside diversity initiatives that even the vast majority of right-leaning people would shrug at.
I also think, that most people at a high level in corporations legitimately believe they've missed out on talent due to structural issues, and since they're greedy capitalists, that's costing them money, which is why they're investing in diversity initiatives. Why not find the gay Latinx trans woman who will find a better way to increase production targets by 3% and earn me a bonus?
Outlaw83
1yr ago
I mean, the reality at least, from my own experiences with women, is that they have stories about harassment and catcalling about anywhere they are, so their issues on transit to them, are likely due not to issues with mass transit, but rather, men. But they can avoid men via a car, and just get catcalled in the parking lot, instead of on the light rail and in the parking lot as well.
Also yes, they aren't going to harass or catcall a woman if there's anybody around they think will attempt to stop them.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
As a leftist mostly open borders, we mostly just don't care, dude.
Like, by the standards of the supposed secret left-wing plan to import a new citizenry to outvote the Old Stock, or whatever, because of the drop in support for the Democrat's among Hispanic voters, there should be some shift in support for amnesty, immigration reform, refugee status, etc., but there hasn't been.
Outside of a few jokes about since Florida is gone, Biden should reverse the Cuban import ban and invited Raul Castro to a state dinner next year, there's been no shift in elected or non-elected support, which seems odd if we're all in on a plan to get rid of whitey.
OTOH, if it turns out we're all bleeding-heart lefties who think America is, has, and always been a land of immigrants where the Old Stock freaked out over being "replaced" since approximately 1776, then there should be no surprise. The Anglo Stock got replaced by the Germans, Swedes, and such who came over. Then those people got scared of the Irish and Italians. Then, those people are currently scared of the Hispanic's and Asian's. In another 40 years, there will be El Savadoran's and Hmong Republican's scaring people about I don't know, Bangladeshi and Cameroonian immigrants taking their jobs, or whatever. As is tradition.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
That's also why the crime dog didn't really hunt in the midterms - in actual urban areas, yes crime rose, but it's not 1989 out there. It's closer to the apocalyptic year of...1997. Which I thought there was nostalgia among the non-woke since it was the decade racism was killed before SJWs reignited it, so if it was such a great time, why are VC's on Twitter freaking out about it being as violent as it was when it was the time they have nostalgia for?
Outlaw83
1yr ago
As an actual group, SBF and his partner gave $32 million to Dem's and $24 million to the GOP. This idea he was some Democrat-only donor simply isn't true.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
I mean, part of the reason Franco's Spain fell apart the second he died is it turned out there was a whole generation of younger people, including the King who actually didn't agree with Franco all that much.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
There is zero evidence of any kind of DeSantis rise outside of the core of the anti-anti-Trump faction on social media - aka, right-wing college-educated conservatives. The type of people who were never going to be NeverTrumpers, but were also never going to be comfortable with Trump and Trump's supporters for a variety of reasons. They want the gaucheness of Trump gone, replaced by a National Review-friendly version in DeSantis, but there's no evidence the actual Trump base is buying into it.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
https://flowingdata.com/2017/11/01/who-is-married-by-now/
This is from 2015, so it's likely slightly lower, but by 40, 81% of men were married.
So yeah, you're in a bubble. Hell, in 2015, you at 33, 70% already were married, so even at worse, let's say only 75% are married by now. Also, divorce has actually gone down since the peak a few decades ago, because the millions of couples who married in 1960 and hated each other by 1964, were able to get divorced.
Sure, there are issues with marriage, but the vast majority of adults in America, end up married by the time they hit 30, at least once.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
You have to realize to a segment of online people, "Blue Tribe" means being opposed to anything Trump or anything adjacent anti-woke people do. At this point, Mike Pence is 'Blue Tribe' is some because of his actions on 1/6.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
I honestly think a lot of people ensconced in an online world of overnight Prime shipping don't realize that it takes time to actually build evidence, even for something obvious, and to get things done. Note, as a social democrat, I get upset w/ my more left-leaning friends who expect Congress to act like a Doordash order, as well.
There was likely no fishiness about how long it took, outside of the usual fishiness when you're dealing with a defendant who might actually have good lawyers, which means the gov't actually has to be careful, as opposed to some random DA going after some random gang member who shot another gang member.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Putting aside what other people have mentioned, cultural change happens really fast a lot of the time, once it reaches an inflection point.
Look at race relations in 1960 and then in 1975, in the culture and the media.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
The problem is the right has been completely unable to actually create a right-wing alternate to the NYT because there is no audience for that among the Right - it's all DailyWire/Brietbart pushing out the sensational stuff or the day or it's money-losing magazines being propped up by rich donors. There is the WSJ, but it seems unwilling to move beyond its place focusing on business news.
The actual problem is 90% of what the NYT is reliably truthful, even to an ardent right-winger.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
The actual reality is almost every Democrat from a purple or blue state was personally in favor of gay marriage by 2008, but they just needed to let the populace get a little more behind it before announcing it officially. Just like basically every Catholic Democratic politician was privately pro-choice, but may have pretended to be pro-life for a while until the last JFK-voting Catholic Democrat's went off into the great beyond or became Republican's.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
This has been ironically why Biden's been a good coalition leader - is that he's always been in the center of the party. Party's now up for a big crime bill - sure, he cares more about the Violence Against Women Act and a gun control bill, but if sending money to local cops passes those as an omnibus, so be it. If people want a lot of spending, he can be for that too.
That means he can work well enough w/ an AOC or a Joe Manchin, and get along with everybody within the coalition, frankly, a lot better than an Obama or a Hillary would've. Because he has reasonable principles, but he's not a super ideologue on the specifics.
That's in part why his response of, "at least three," and then basically making fun of the person asking the gender question from some random troll on the campaign trail was actually the best one, because it comes the closest to the average American's view. "I don't care, it's probably at least three from what my kids tell me, and you're weird for thinking about it so much, buddy."
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Why should new landowners subsidize lower property taxes for incumbent landowners who had some good luck in where they bought a few decades ago?
If somebody is truly worried about high property taxes, they should either accept that's the price for living where they want, or want more building to lower their property values. You can have high property values or low property taxees - not both, unless you want the current housing issues that California has.
If anything, one of the positives of Texas's tax laws that helps incentivize more building is a decent chunk of their income comes from property taxees.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
You're not going to find the kind of pulpy novels Correia and Torgersen were complaining were overlooked*.
That's the complaint I never got - to quote Mad Men, "that what the money was for." The other stuff, even if I disagreed, I at least understood why they were upset, even if I thought they were silly, but mid-tier pulp in any genre has never really won awards. But yeah, before most people currently complaining about the state of sci-fi were even alive, sci-fi prizes had gone away from military sci-fi or the type of stuff supposedly being locked out by the SJW's, because it was old hat.
I also think you're right the whole Puppy business not only pushed away a lot of 'centrist' voters to stop getting involved, but activated a whole new group of voters who frankly, saw a bunch of whom they saw as assholes trying to steal awards, and get involved to stop it.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
When you looked at richest/poorest Senator lists, Biden was always at the bottom, or just above Bernie during his whole entire time there, and only became slightly more wealthy because of the usual appearance fee circuit, some book deals, and the like. Part of the reason the whole 'Biden is secretly corrupt' is failing outside the most partisan Red Tribers, when less than great views about Obama or Hillary extended past that, is that it doesn't pass the BS meter of the median voter - the median voter can buy Hillary is corrupt, Obama is conceited, and Trump is an asshole. They simply see nothing showing that Biden is making secret deals.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Honestly, as a member of the Left, the muted response to Biden basically shutting down the drone war and getting out of Afghanistan showed me while there are some honest brokers among the anti-war left who spent 8 years attacking Obama, but many of them are just anti-Democratic Party, not anti-war. Not even getting into the small group of contarians who acted like Trump was a peacemaker, then ignored Biden actually being the least war hawkish POTUS since probably Carter or some guy in the early 20th century.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
This has actually been a problem for the California GOP (and to a lesser extent, Democratic parties in places like say, Wyoming). The only people left to vote for the out-party are the radicals, which give the radicals more power, which turns off the median voter in the state, and thus, the power becomes even less popular.
Somebody could've beat Newsom in the recall, but they would've had to actually meet the median Californian voter where they were - instead, Republican voters got behind Larry Elder, who has a multi-decade career as a right-wing entertainer.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Hell, we had the supreme court justice primarily selected on her identity
This is always the worst example people who dislike affirmative action bring up. First, the idea that there are specific seats for various ethnic groups or genders or whatever has been true of the Supreme Court since the early 20th century when there was a Jewish seat. In addition, there's no actual way to determine whose the best qualified person to be a Supreme Court Justice, outside of personal political beliefs, and if there are a few dozen people who'd basically vote the same, there's no reason to not try to diversify things.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Why is it affront to liberalism to name a well-qualified person to the Court who also happens to make sure the Court better reflects what the nation looks like? Like, I'm pretty sure for the entirety of it's existence, there existed Jewish judges that were qualified enough to be on the Court, because, the idea there is a most-qualified person to be on the Court just isn't true.
For the same reason people may be "tired" of the Marvel formula, but those movies still make hundreds of millions, because there are millions of literal children/teenagers and also, millions of non-English speaking people globally who have basically teenage minds when it comes to Western entertainment, such as YT videos or blockbuster movies.
In the 70's and 80's, not only did those in charge of making entertainment were largely from the entertainment business, but since you didn't really know why a movie made a lot of money, you could make it a little smarter or whatever. Now, in a world where every script has been thrown into a computer to analyze for best performance, and the guy writing the checks used to run the theme park division of the same corporation six months ago, there's going to be nobody who cares about appealing to more than the median consumer, and the sad reality, is a lot of even successful movies from the 70's and 80's and 90's could've been even more successful if they were a little dumber - the rest of the audience were basically paying a tax to appease smarter viewers because those people were in charge.
Now, they're not.
More options
Context Copy link