close

WS v. Adviser of Mayor Lebron

in ,
“You must choose either: 1. The Indians will win at least one WS soon with this core of players (not by any nefarious or goofy means, they’ll win and you won’t remember having made this deal). In the ensuing hysteria, Cleveland elects a mayor who dresses up as Chief Wahoo, face paint and all, calls himself Chief Wahoo and ‘acts’ how he thinks Chief Wahoo would act if he came to life, saying insensitive and useless things like “Chief Wahoo promise to trade for wampum for his Cleveland tribe.” OR 2. After his playing career, LeBron gets elected mayor of Cleveland and gives you a position as one of his advisers. You must work in this role for at least two years.”
— Mikey

These are fairly close.  The tipping point is that I get to be one of Lebron’s advisers, which would mean that I’m employed, get to know and spend time with Lebron James (and all the benefits that surely come with that) and get to influence the mayor of Cleveland with my ideas.  I don’t think Lebron would be a great mayor - I’m fairly sure he’s celebrity liberal with all the hijacked moral high ground beliefs in institutional problems.  This also usually means an accompanying tendency to point towards government intervention, programs, and regulation to solve perceived problems as opposed to a tendency to push for a freer society.  But he’s shown signs of intelligence and wisdom in his life, and I’d get to give my input before he does something like appoint Board of Education chairmen that support Common Core or lockout a developer from bulldozing the Burke Lakefront Airport and turning it into a series of waterside apartments.  I doubt he’d be a worse mayor under those conditions than some racially insensitive asshole doing rain dances while refusing to properly conjugate verbs or refer to himself in the first person.  The reason it’s close is I’d have to, in two years as a mayoral adviser, do more good to the city of Cleveland than would be done by an Indians World Series win and a World Series win would do a lot of good, even if it also sent the sports media into an agonizing spiral of Native American obsession, accusations of racism, and demands on private organizations not conducive to a free world.  I think I might be able to.  Mayor James, might I suggest getting rid of our city income tax?

Writing v. Tebow

in
“You learn you could make it as a writer for as long as you’d like, but only if you write about Tim Tebow. It can be an extensive series, but Tim Tebow has to be a very prominent character in every story. Do you do it?”
— Mikey
Tebow v Writing PCV.jpg

No.  That's a sad thought.  I'd choose to do something else with my life.  Tim Tebow just isn't that interesting.  Even the Tebow phenomena isn't that interesting anymore.

FDR Punch v. Straws

in
“Would you go back to the 1920’s and take a potshot at FDR (during the time when he had polio) and then immediately return to the present day if you had to drink every drink for the rest of your life with a straw? ”
— Mikey
FDR punch v straw PCV.jpg

It's a great question Mikey, and I'm really glad you've asked it.  I see the problem as a threefold:

1)  What are the personal repercussions of taking a potshot at the man who many view as an American hero who I see as the father of the loan generation, the generation that borrowed from me and my fellow young people and now can't pay back.  From a logistical standpoint, I'd be arrested, imprisoned, and/or shot in (I assume you meant) the 30's no less, which would definitely be a downside, but you did stipulate that I'd be immediately teleported back to present day, which would presumably prevent those back-in-time legal and physical issues to my person.  Yet, there's no statute of limitations on assault, so could be that I'd be arrested in 2017 for punching FDR in 1934, and imprisoned now, which makes the whole straw thing a moot point.  Drink from a straw, not from a straw, who gives a shit if I have to do 5-15 in a West Virginian prison?  All this leads to a tentative, "rather not."

2)  But the bigger issue is, what are the global repercussions, and that becomes a complex matter of time travel paradoxes and the butterfly effect, for which I and no one has a clear answer.  The potential damage to the universe of me taking a potshot at FDR is catastrophic, especially considering I'd be physically attacking a sickly old man in a wheelchair right before the greatest armed conflict and moral battle of world conquest in the history of our species.  That leads to a less tentative "no" on the hypothetical.  Again, the issue of the straw drinking becomes largely irrelevant next to something as horrifying as the axis powers winning World War II or The Milky Way imploding because I ripped a hole in reality through which all nearby stars were pulled into an unfathomable realm of unbeing.  At the very least, if I have the power to go back and punch historical figures from the era and I really wanted to risk disrupting the fabric of space and time, I'd punch Hitler.  But that's beyond the confines of your hypothetical and so I apologize for the digression.

3)  If you suppose that the punching is going to have no meaningful impact on history or reality, then the hypothetical becomes a little more tenable.  I'd say "no" it's not worth it for me to punch a guy with whose policies, that are now several decades old, I firmly disagree, if I then have to drink from a straw for every drink for the rest of my life.  I might enjoy the moment, but I'd not suffer the humiliation of drinking beer from a straw until the day I die.  That'd be awful.  And Pepsi and lemonade iced tea in my own home, with my own glasses, with my high quality filtered ice, with a straw?  Abhorrent.  I don't like these social programs, but I really don't like straws.  Now, if I was able to bring a friend with me and he could film the repercussionless potshot on my iphone and then that footage could be uploaded to YouTube and turn me not only into a semi-sadistic celebrity overnight but also a symbol of free market politics and generational justice, I'd change my mind on the issue.  Not because that alone outweighs the fucking straw, but because such fame would make it much easier to publish my novels.

Ice Cream v. Beer

in
“You can only eat ice cream or drink beer going forward in life. Which one do you choose?”
— Mikey
Ice Cream v. Beer PCV.jpeg

Ice cream.  Assuming that you mean I have to decide between giving up ice cream forever versus giving up beer forever, but with the rest of my diet remaining unaffected, I would give up beer.  I like ice cream more.  Though not much more.

If you mean that I'm only allowed to consume all ice cream or all beer then I also choose ice cream.  Both options would likely lead to my imminent death, but ice cream would be slower and I might survive if I was allowed to have all ranges of exotic favors.  This ice cream has steak in it and green beans!

Costner v. Crowe

in
“Either Kevin Costner or Russell Crowe is your father (from birth). Which one do you pick?”
— Mikey
Costner v Crowe PCV.jpg

I don't know about the personalities of either man, but the just based on the movies each is in I think I have more similar tastes and sensibilities to Crowe.  Also Crowe is perhaps a bit more successful, which has more tangible monetary rewards.  With regard to who would be the better father, it's a toss up.  They both seem like stern yet compassionate men who would encourage success from their children.  At no slight to my own father, they both seem fine choices.  

NCAA Shill v. Homoeroticism

in
“You must choose between the following: you become a paid shill for the NCAA. This means that you have to travel the country promoting NCAA policies and vouch for its usefulness and mission. This includes going on TV for panel shows and interviews in addition to giving presentations at conferences and universities. You are away from home 3-4 out of 5 work days and you are paid $70,000 a year after taxes. Your other option is that you have to have balls in your face for 3 minutes in a row, once a month for a full year. You don’t get to choose when this happens. Which do you choose?”
— Mikey
NCAA Shill v. Homoeroticism.jpg

I choose balls in face.  That's not a thousandth as gross as being a relatively low paid shill for the NCAA.  Plus, the job takes me away from Maisy a lot.  Even more horrifying.  NCAA has policies I don't believe in and I think are bad for millions of people.  It's very hard to get me to compromise my ethics.  I'd rather be in the Dark Knight Rises prison again.

Repetitive Rap v. Sleeve Tearing

in
“Would you rather listen to Game Over by Lil Flip once a week for twenty years or rip the sleeves off every shirt you own?”
— Mikey

This one is actually pretty easy.  I listened to the song; it's your standard rap fare of bragging about wealth while vaguely dancing near partially dressed women.  If I had to listen to it once a week for twenty years, I'd come to hate it more than just about any other rap song, but that's kind of besides the point.  Let's just call it time wasted.  The song runs about three minutes, or a 180 seconds, and that time would essentially be completely wasted every time I listened to it.  Over twenty years that's 187,200 seconds wasted or 52 hours wasted.  If you value my time at $15 / hour, that's a cost of $780.  I just went through my closet.  I'd be disappointed at the loss of the sleeves of about ten of my favorite shirts, including a few new work shirts, but mostly, I need cooler clothes.  I'd guess the sum value of all my shirts is a hair higher than $800, and it'd certainly be more to replace them, but the investment itself would be worth something since so much of my wardrobe is faded shit t-shirts I've had for fifteen years.  Granted there's a time cost to replacing everything too, but put at about 10 hours, I'd say it's still worth ripping the sleeves off every shirt I own and then immediately going shopping.  Kind of close though.