Mayweather-Pacquiao, Saturday May 2 On Tv Pública

OK, try this: http://www.rulesofba....com/quiz1.html

And meanwhile I'll enjoy myself, as right now there's a ball game on (I am perfectly contented to pay for my subscription to MLBTV).

Not sure what that link is supposed to prove. Every sport has rules.

I'm glad you're enjoying baseball. I enjoy a game or two per week, especially later in the (very long) season. When I lived in the Bay Area, I would go to at least 1-2 A's and Giants games a year.

But, I don't pretend that baseball is much more than one man throwing a ball while another tries to hit it.
 
I dont get you guys, you get the fight for free and you complain?!?!?!


There are two options, one is to pay and the other is to watch it for free. In the first option, if you pay, theres someone making a profit, some private, individual subject that makes a lot of money by charging you the fight. Wouldnt you call that situation panem et circenses too? I mean, after all, its pretty much the same but the only difference is that people are paying for the fight. Wouldnt the people watch it anyway?
The same happens with futbol. If its not the government (again: the posibility to watch all the matches for free!) theres a company that takes it, that wins, that it is maffious as well as the government can be. In fact, they were!!! Thats why I like this government: they just stopped this big bussiness for companies like Torneos and give it for free to the people. Again: its very simplistic to think that they get votes this way or with a choripan, why cant we think they concern about peoples tastes and hobbies and interests and just bring some joy to the people for free? After all, thats what it is.

The whole point is that it's not free, if you pay taxes you indirectly pay for it if you like boxing or not. This is obviously true for all public services, but I have my doubts if I'd consider watching boxing as a service that should be in the public interest and thus government financed. There's also nothing wrong to provide additional services, but given this country has problems to provide basic needs in a good quality in certain areas, I'd argue that there are more important areas to invest the money than watching 22 players competing for a ball or 2 guys hitting each other. To break it down for you very simply: if you have an amount of x US$ and can decide if you want to build a new school/pay a bit more to teachers/build a hospital/etc. or fund the purse of a boxer/put some money to have a couple of rigged soccer games, what to you think would benefit the people of Argentina more...
 
The whole point is that it's not free, if you pay taxes you indirectly pay for it if you like boxing or not. This is obviously true for all public services, but I have my doubts if I'd consider watching boxing as a service that should be in the public interest and thus government financed. There's also nothing wrong to provide additional services, but given this country has problems to provide basic needs in a good quality in certain areas, I'd argue that there are more important areas to invest the money than watching 22 players competing for a ball or 2 guys hitting each other. To break it down for you very simply: if you have an amount of x US$ and can decide if you want to build a new school/pay a bit more to teachers/build a hospital/etc. or fund the purse of a boxer/put some money to have a couple of rigged soccer games, what to you think would benefit the people of Argentina more...

You overlook the fact that Peronism creates infinite budget resources. In an economy based on magical realism, this is barely a blip on Kicillof's komputer.
 
Back
Top