I can't say for Melton, but Nick appears to be trying to cut a very fine line of "I didn't break any of the rules" while doing as much as possible to antagonize Aaron. Yes, he argued it's okay to talk like that about someone's kid, as long as you don't say it to them to distress them; completely ignoring how a parent may take that. Which is why I also think it's morally justified to genocide anyone who fancies themselves a comedian.
Nick is doing the 'I am not touching you!', bit while holding his finger .000001 mm from the other party.
This is the logical extension of the Lolbert NAP and 'I can swing my arms about wildly as long as I do not strike anyone' and 'Your rights end at the tip of my nose' carried to extreme as justification for bad behaviour. The base premise (that men are able to self-regulate) is retarded and leaves it open to exploitation.
Wasn't it something about about one his daughters liking this male pop star or something. He then goes on this long winded monologue about he told his daughter that was weird cause the celebrity wasn't Muslim and he wouldn't date her. I feel like it was around the time he got arrested.
This only left me thinking two things
- The story is probably fake but Nick still went out of his way to have this fake conversation about him telling his daughter that some male pop star wouldn't be her boyfriend or some shit like
- This story was prime example about why Nick's show became unwatchable. He would start of with premise, usually not funny, and would just keep going on and on till it became this weird and incomprehensible story. Another example would be the "cops at Denny's" joke.
It was a KPOP star or something, as I recall, and the joke was as you retell it. It seemed like a normal pre-adolescent fixation, but Nick had to make a horrid joke of it.
I think Nicky Rackets dips into his kids' college fund (with Mom's assistance and approval) to pay people both in supertips and under the table. I think he's buying allies.
Nick has publicly stated that he does not belive in university education (outside of STEM and credentialed occupations as a societal requirement) so he never put any money away form his wild success for their benefit.
Nick isn't supporting a family of 7 from his YouTube streaming.
His trust fund conditions remain unknown, but the existence of it didn't stop him going into forclosure or prevent him from cancelling the food delivery service they had.
So, I'd suggest the amount he has ability to access is low.
Circumstances can change, the foreclosure was months ago, and applying normal person logic to this family doesn't work. I agree you're being logical, my point is that Mama Rackets & Son are shitty people who have awful priorities (i.e. "Getting Aaron" vs. "Maintenance").
There has been mucu theory-crafting, but there are a few speculative points I think important to mention:
- Nick was always subsidised to some extent. You cannot support his family ans lifestyle with his employment history
- Nick never got all the money he ever wanted form his parents
- Nick's parents probably wrangled him his whole life and tried to get him to become independent, but failed. The failure of the mortgage to be paid may have been some attempts to hand over controll to have him be 'more responsible'--even if they were still cutting the cheque.
- Nick may have had a change in his financial support condition due to his Rittenhouse/Depp successes--however short-lived.
- When Nick had unfettered access to money, he squandered it all.
