Starting this fall, San Diego will be short a professional sports team. After the city’s voters rejected an initiative last fall that would have funded a new stadium for the San Diego Chargers, the NFL team has moved to Los Angeles. This leaves the hulking, midcentury concrete block of a stadium where the Chargers used to play without a major tenant. But it also gave FS Investors, a group who want to bring a Major League Soccer team to San Diego, an idea: They would demolish Qualcomm Stadium and redevelop the land to make way for a soccer-specific stadium and a mix of parkland, commercial space and homes.
The voters may get their chance to say whether this project goes forward this November. FS Investors, who could have gone straight to the city council for approval, have decided to bring in citizens on whether this stadium should be built. Why so confident? Because the plan they’re putting up for a vote is pretty different than stadium initiatives in the past.
FS Investors appear to have wizened up to the idea that large municipalities have become more and more intolerant of bankrolling stadiums for billionaires. So, instead of asking San Diego residents for a $350-million handout, like the Chargers did, they are going to put up the money themselves. They’re only seeking permission to knock down the old stadium and zone the land for their redevelopment, in what will hopefully be a model for future stadium funding.
But, not every prospective MLS owner got the memo about the public’s distaste for funding stadiums with taxpayer dollars. St. Louis, long a bastion of soccer culture in the United States, has been vying for an MLS team much like San Diego. And with the league saying it would award two expansion teams this year, St. Louis put forward a bid most people believed would be successful, owing to the city’s soccer heritage. That all fell apart last night when voters rejected the proposal for providing $60 million in public financing toward a St. Louis soccer stadium. The group had put up a sizable chunk of its own money, but at a time when city and state budgets are strapped, it didn’t make sense to voters to see their cash going to a stadium.
There are certainly cities still falling for this pro sports stadium cash grab. Despite ample evidence showing that stadiums don’t actually boost a local economy in the way their proponents say they do, a weird sense of civic pride sometimes trumps rational thought when it comes to sports. The Atlanta Braves have fleeced Cobb County, Georgia, for their new digs. Las Vegas just gave the Raiders $750 million to leave Oakland. And the Miami Marlins have saddled South Beach with billions in dollars of debt for the team’s home. But what’s really encouraging is that Miami appears to have learned something from the Marlins debacle and rejected the Dolphins pleas for a handout to upgrade its facilities. So what will Dolphin’s billionaire owner Stephen Ross going to do? Well, he’s going to put up the $400 million himself. Progress!
An elderly man walks down an icy roadCanva 
An elderly man grilling at a partyCanva
Time to declutter
Representative Image: Making pizzas for hungry people. Pexels I Photo by Jvxhn Visuals
Representative Image Source: Pexels I Photo by Polina Tankilevitch
Representative Image: Is there anything better than pepperoni? Pexels I Photo by Pixabay
"This story made my whole night better." Reddit I 
Two people enjoying a walk through the woods
A woman pets her dogCanva 
A woman stands in front of a window listening to musicCanva
A group of people sit around a circle talkingCanva
A woman sleeping in bedCanva
Woman proudly displays an "I Voted" stickerCanva
A woman's ear with multiple piercingsCanva
A woman takes a bit out of a huge strawberry cakeCanva
The back of a woman's head with silver hair. Canva
A woman watches the sunset from her carCanva
A nurse holds a clipboard in a hospital hallwayCanva
A heavily-tattooed woman holds a mug of coffeeCanva
Stressed out man at workCanva
Stressed employee takes a break from workCanva
Overhead shot of three employees sharing a deskCanva
A pile of cashCanva
A pregnant woman clutches her bellyCanva
An eviction noticeCanva
Supportive Reddit comment Reddit | 
A gavel rests in front of a judgeCanva
Female shopper looking for help
21 products that are gaslighting us into thinking they’re essential when they’re not
Some things in life are actually necessary—clean water, decent healthcare, basic human decency. But then there are the things that feel like they’re gaslighting us. The things we’re told we can’t live without, even though we survived just fine before they existed. Things like "smart" fridges, lawn fertilizer services, and yes—whole body deodorant.
Recently, our sister-site Upworthy asked their Facebook audience the question: What's a product or service that feels like it's gaslighting all of us into thinking it's necessary? More than 8,000 responses poured in. The answers were passionate, funny, and surprisingly unified.
Here are 21 products, services, and systems people called out for pretending to be essential—when they might actually be optional, overpriced, or flat-out invented.
1. Whole body deodorant
"Take a shower," said Shannon H.
“How did we ever manage all those years without it!! 😂😵💫” added Karen R.
Others noted it may help people with medical conditions—but for the average person, it's definitely a marketing creation.
2. Health insurance
It topped the list. Erica L. explained: “My doctor prescribes, the pharmacist issues meds, nurses care for people, surgeons do surgery—Health Insurance stands between health care and patients and says no, exclusively on whether they think it’s financially effective to treat you.”
Important note: Health insurance can provide life-saving access for many—but what people are frustrated by here is the profit-first system, not care itself.
3. The wedding industry
Multiple people slammed the high cost of modern weddings.
JoElla B. put it plainly: “We spend too much time and money planning one day, and not enough thought on how to blend two lives in a mutually beneficial one.”
Others called out expensive dresses, venues, and pressure to perform for social media.
4. Bottled water
Carole D. said: “Water in plastic bottles! Get a cup!”
While bottled water has value in emergencies, it’s often just filtered tap water—sold for profit in plastic.
5. Baby product overload
“Most baby products,” wrote Kelli O. “They really aren’t as needy and complicated as companies want us to think.”
6. Fabric softener
“It’s bad for clothes, bad for the Earth, bad for the wallet, and totally unnecessary,” said Gail H.
Some experts agree—many softeners contain chemicals that can reduce fabric lifespan and irritate skin.
7. Smart appliances
“Adding ‘phone controls’ to every appliance instead of making them last as long as they used to,” wrote Sherry S.
When your fridge needs a software update, something’s gone off the rails.
8. Makeup and anti-aging products
“Anything anti-aging,” said Melissa T., “Please just let me age into the gargoyle I was meant to become.”
Others questioned products designed to “fix” eyelashes, eyebrows, pores, and graying hair.
April S. added, “Products that women are convinced they MUST have in order to be ‘beautiful’ and therefore ‘loved.’”
9. Cosmetic surgery
Ron P. called out the industry as a whole. And while body autonomy matters, many commenters questioned whether insecurities are being commodified and sold back to us.
10. Ticketmaster and “convenience fees”
“Let’s go back to waiting in line at a record store,” wrote Nicole C.
Zaida B. added: “Convenience fee for online purchases—then charging $10 more at the actual event.”
11. Engagement rings
James P. didn’t mince words: “Engagement rings.”
The diamond industry has long been criticized for manufactured scarcity and marketing-fueled necessity.
12. Lawn chemicals and services
“Plant native grasses and you don’t have the pests or need for constant watering,” wrote Jamie B.
Environmental groups have raised similar concerns over runoff and unnecessary pesticide use.
13. AI and generative tech
“This stuff squeezes the lifeblood and individuality out of the human experience,” said Teresa L.
Saskia D. and others echoed skepticism about its necessity, even as many of us are being pushed to use it.
14. Funeral services
Amy W. shared: “My parents both have already paid to have themselves cremated and are very adamant that they do not want anything big done for them. In their words, ‘I won’t care, I’m dead.’”
Of course, some families find comfort in tradition—but the cost and pressure can feel overwhelming and predatory.
15. Rinse and repeat
Amy D. nailed it: “It’s just to sell more. Not even sure you need it at all.”
16. Credit Card Surcharges
Shawn S. took aim at the extra fees popping up at checkout: “That is the cost of doing business and shouldn’t be the burden of the purchaser.”
Many questioned why customers are increasingly being asked to pay extra simply for the convenience of using a card.
17. Constant phone upgrades
“Apple are notorious for releasing the same shit every year,” said Steph S.
Diana H. added, “Needing to upgrade our phones so frequently.”
Built-in obsolescence and marketing cycles drive most of the demand.
18. Vitamins and supplements
“If I took every supplement they say I NEED I wouldn’t need food. Nor could I afford it,” said Tausha L.
19. Fake pockets on women’s pants
Jessica W. said, “I have to buy men’s pants for work because women’s pants would just get torn up too fast!”
Form over function, and then they charge more for it.
20. Disposable everything
“The ‘convenience’ of disposable everything,” said Rick R.
It’s killing the planet—and draining wallets.
21. Tipping
“I’m sick of supplementing for corporations that refuse to pay a living wage,” wrote Susan V.
Tipping culture has evolved into something far removed from its original intent, and for many, it now feels like a burden shifted onto the customer.
The bigger picture
People aren’t saying all these things should vanish tomorrow. But when we start seeing convenience sold as necessity, and insecurity turned into billion-dollar markets, it's worth asking: who benefits from all of this?
And more importantly—who pays?
This article originally appeared earlier this year.