Just How Much Did Americans Pay for Super Bowl XLIX?

Just How Much Did Americans Pay for Super Bowl XLIX?

(NFL Set to Not Consider .01 Cent Rule)

The truth is, Americans will never know, because America lacks an independent media.  Americans themselves will just go on wearing this millstone of debt around their necks until they die and the next generations take over, paying the debt for Super Bowls until kingdom come.

Watching the super bowl over the phone with my folks when the halftime came on, I couldn’t help but think of the American taxpayers who had to support this orgy of private wealth—the fly-bys, the endlessly circulating public employees and no-fly zones and massive military presence, the CIA and endless governmental and public, publicly-paid for money that went in to making the NFL, no pauper itself, richer than ever before.  What truly was the final account of the massive public expenditure that the American people had to pay for having a super bowl?  We will never know, for America, like most undeveloped countries and some developed, lacks an impartial media with access to information.

It’s true that most Americans probably watched the super bowl on their TVs.  For those who didn’t, well, they had to pay their taxes, too, just like people who don’t like letting seniors live in homes, but have to pay for it, do too.

I had a look at an American financial site and read an article by a person named Kelly Phillips Erb:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2015/02/01/salaries-ads-security-whats-the-real-cost-of-super-bowl-xlix/

In her article, she gushes over how much money was made by players and coaches and halftime entertainers, and she meekly wonders if the host city and state themselves made any money, faintly referring to carefully selected data and not actually referring to what economists have shown for eons, that big sporting events don’t make money but usually lose it for taxpayers.  I’m sorry, but if a big team comes to my city, it doesn’t mean that I will buy more hamburgers or gas.  If the Rolling Stones experienced engine troubles and had to land on my roof, it wouldn’t mean I had more money to pay for them.  I have a certain amount of money.  Right-wing economists don’t seem to understand this; they think imaginary money miraculously materializes when an event is announced—somewhere, anywhere. Hoteliers and restaurateurs might be able to gouge for a short period and make money, but that does not translate to long-term economic activity.  Curious that any corporate extension but Forbes, getting paid to think so, would think otherwise.  I, taxpayer, though, will have to pay for more cops and setup and maintenance and teardown and cleanup and civic services.  I suppose there may be those millions upon millions of tourists who magically descend once they’ve seen my city on TV, but Kelly doesn’t reflect on that—show some imagination, Kelly!! 

The main thing Kelly leaves out, though, is the one she has to face in the mirror each morning as she puts on her game face—gets the makeup on and the eyeblack so as to avoid the blaring lights of day and reality and so on—just how much federal money went into this and just how much average taxpayers—losers and poor people and coloured people unlike her, had to pay in order to fund her article and fund the bowl, and just how much everyday Americans would have to pay and pay and pay, until kingdom come, to pay for the enjoyment her household relished.

Look, here’s the crux: most people of most countries who have national celebrations of some sort would say, ok, even if I don’t like it, I still pay taxes for it and it’s ok.  OK.  But the NFL is a different breed.  This is a league that will pay former head-injured players $765 million (.5% of annual revenue) to shut up and go away (http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2013/08/29/nfl-pays-765-million-to-settle-concussion-case-still-wins/).

This is a league that will pay its commissioner $44 million to pretend he never saw video the rest of America did (and, of course, as “Kelly Phillips Erb” knows but would lose her job if she said, pay far less in tax than a McDonald’s employee).  This is the league that will. . .domestic abuse. . .homicide. . .concussions. . .child abuse. . .drug abuse. . .steroids. . .you get my point.

When does the socializing of debt and the privatizing of wealth stop?  Does America have any media at all?  What if the NFL introduced a one cent rule, stipulating that one cent from every dollar made by networks and sponsors and owners and players and coaches, and one matching cent from every dollar American taxpayers had to pay for military and security support, had to go to educating Americans and creating a playing field for the majority of Americans who don’t vote and are disenfranchised by race or economic status or gender or gerrymandering.  What if?  What if the super bowl could become not only a sporting contest, but a force for national growth and improvement?  What if?

--zr

 

Martin Short releases new biography: How I Ended Up so Desperate I Had to Shill for Companies that Will Help You Die Early or Bankrupt, Whichever Comes First

Martin Short releases new biography: How I Ended Up so Desperate I Had to Shill for Companies that Will Help You Die Early or Bankrupt, Whichever Comes First

I’m wondering now—was all that shilling just meant to get him out there as advance-promo for his new book?  How hard up is this guy?  How little work does he have, or how little money does he have left?  How desperate do you have to be to shill for credit cards and potato chips?  Or, how many millions more does he feel he really, really needs?

Saw Short on The Daily Show (Feb. 2, 2015). I remember Martin Short from SCTV days, and I, ah, must say that I really enjoyed his comedy.  I surely thought he was very funny and maybe talented, too.  He was a bit more one-note than most of his colleagues on the show, but there’s no doubting that he was one funny guy.  I guess he was in movies, too, but I don’t think those are going down in comedy history, save one or two whose memory might be kept alive by ardent devotees of certain works (heck, I knew a guy who actually knew pretty much every line from Mother, Jugs & Speed, for crying out loud.  That’s Mother, Jugs & Speed—if I hadn’t looked it up, I wouldn’t have realized it required an ampersand).  I guess he’s been in plays and live shows, too, but I haven’t seen one.  Oh, I’d go, if someone gave me a ticket.  Or if I were in New York, I’d go and see him, after I’d seen about 12-15 other things and felt I had the spacious time and indeflatable wallet so to do. 

But of course what I remember him for now is his recent shilling for credit-card companies and potato-chip vendors.  So I’m just wondering if, anywhere in his new book, he explains why he felt he was so hard-up and desperate that he had to do ads for immoral and unhealthy products. . . ?  Is such a topic addressed?  I must say, I probably won’t be seeing his book anytime soon—but again, it’s not like I’d avoid it.  He has done great comedic work.  If the choice in a dentist’s office were People, Us, or his book, I’d pick it up.  If I were staring absently at a library trolley while I waited for someone and the choice were Clive Cussler, Harold Robbins, or his book, I’d pick it up.  Knowing that he wants to get me hooked on debt or fat, and that he’s raking in money from doing it, certainly discourages me from actually actively looking for his book. 
 

Ok, so that was it, the point of my post—does anyone know why Martin Short was so desperate for cash or attention that he agreed to shill for companies that contribute to the misery and death of millions of North Americans?  I mean, it kind of is a real question, one that could be thought about from various angles, or, yes, just dismissed as frivolous, which it may, but not exclusively, be.

And now, as this post peters out, I will offer a few more words--but obviously they could never be enough—in pre-emptive defense against those who might muster ire enough to tell me I’m a jerk for telling Martin Short what to do.

I guess if I’m Martin Short, which I’m not, getting out there is what keeps me alive.  Doing some shtick, being in front of the cameras, that’s oxygen; no cameras=death.  I get it.  All celebrities pitch products.  Hey, if I were Martin Short, which I’m not, and Ford or Toyota came to me and gave me a spanking new vehicle with all the bangles (that I could keep or give away to someone, and whose options I could not find at a dealership), and drove me around and showed me all the neat new things it had, yeah, sure, I’d probably find myself thinking up some grateful shtick for it and raking in the royalties.  Money, even when you don’t need it, must be nice to acquire, and since the vehicle is free, it’s not like you’d end up with ruinous financing terms that sink so many working people and families.  Critics, and studio backers, don’t critique ads nearly like they critique turkey-flop movies—bad ads actually can be good for your career; bad movies, maybe not so much.  Maybe Marty wants to become the next Shatner, who has become a kind of advertising meme unto himself—with Shatner, both the product and the pitchman kind of become irrelevant, but that Shatner, the meme, is situated alongside the logo, in itself gives a kind of credence to the effability of the logo, or, product.

Many might say, hey, nobody put a gun to your head telling you to get a credit card or buy a bag of potato chips.  But that’s just being simplistic and idiotic.  Ever tried to rent a car or make a major purchase or do just about anything without a credit card?  Come on.  Credit cards used to be pitched as “convenient”—i.e., when you had no cash, you could use credit.  But in the debit era, credit card companies had to insinuate new ways into your lives, including not protecting you against hacking, etc.  Of course I’ve had and have credit cards.  They don’t improve my life; they’re a necessary evil and sometime nuisance I had no choice but to get in order to do other basic human life things I had no trouble doing before I had to get a credit card in order to be allowed to do them.

Have a look at the one that Marty pitches:

http://www.capitalone.ca/credit-cards/aspire-travel-world/

Only $120/year to own, and a tiny prime + 16.8% to carry around.  No worries if you’re Marty Short—but, if you're not Marty Short, a lifetime of misery if you make one slip-up, one bad decision, your card gets hijacked, you experience an injury or a job loss or a. . .thing that might happen in life to which CapitalOne is immune (too big to fail) but you are not.  And this is what Marty is desperate to pitch.

Or potato chips, and Marty’s proud new Pepsi partnership:

http://pepsico.ca/en/PressRelease/Martin-Short-partners-with-the-Lays-brand-and-invites-Canadians-to-create-the-br02042013.html

Now, do I like pop?  I guess I do.  Do I like potato chips?  Of course I do.  That’s why I don’t buy them.  I have a colleague who may be dead before 50 because she can’t stay away from them.  Do I have no bad habits?  Of course not.  Do I have good habits?  You bet I do.  Everyone has good and bad habits and everyone is more or less passionate about different ones.  Given the choice, I’d probably rather be locked in a room with someone who had only bad habits as opposed to only good ones. 

But that still does not explain why a mammothly wealthy person such as Martin Short (just to get a little shtick and face time and enrich himself superfluously) has to advertise for companies who have documented, long-term, and virtually undeniable deleterious effects on a sizeable minority, if not a majority, of the people who fall under their sway.

 It’s a wonder to me.

-zr

 I must say