5 ms·

You know who else didn’t get paid in the 19th century? Computer programmers. Things change the reason why entertainment professionals are paid more these days

You know who else didn’t get paid in the 19th century? Computer programmers. Things change the reason why entertainment professionals are paid more these days is because we have the ability to leverage their product through modern technology and the fact that the abundance of resources that even developing countries have today allows people to value entertainment. And no most scientists were not rich by any means outside of a few in the UK many of them were quite poor and were often living on a stipend provided by institutions or private patrons. And sorry to burst your bubble but A list actors historically became very wealthy in countries where entertainment was appreciated.

lisper 8y ago
It's true that economic conditions change with technological advances, and that the general trend is that fewer and fewer people are required to meet the demand for any particular product. It does not follow that we as a society should adopt a policy that those who manage to capture markets are entitled to a proportionate (note that I deliberately did NOT say DISproportionate) share of society's wealth. Most of our social mores were designed under the assumption that production, not consumption, was the limiting factor in our economies. But that is starting to change. If we don't change the rules to accord with this new reality it will cause serious problems. If only 1% of the world's population is required to meet 110% of the world's demand for everything (and that could very well happen within our lifetimes), what are we going to do with the remaining 99%?
- dogma1138 8y ago
  The problem is then what is proportionate and how do you estimate it? Should Apple be taxed more than Google? Should an actor that gets paid 10 million dollars for a movie be taxed more than an actor who’s paid 5? What if the actor that is paid 10 is has 5 times more views just in less valued markets? Should I who works as an engineer for a financial institution be taxed more than an engineer working for SpaceX or NASA?
  - lisper 8y ago
    Proportionate is easy: if you're making money in the free market, then manifestly what you are making is proportionate to the value you are providing to someone. The problem is that some people's contributions measured this way are wildly disproportionate to other people's contributions. A movie star really is providing orders of magnitude more value than a McDonalds cashier. The question is: should a movie star therefore be entitled to orders of magnitude more compensation? It's not clear that the answer to that really ought to be "yes".
    - dogma1138 8y ago
      Proportionate isn't clear, again don't mistake the dollar amount they pay in taxes with their tax, while we cap taxation for a good reason as progressive upto 100% is a very bad idea. And yes it is clear to anyone who studied economics, and more importantly it's really depressing that you are using these populist arguments how about replacing the movie star with a doctor? Is it ok we pay a doctor who spent the better part of the first 30 years of their life becoming one and would spend the next 30-40 years being one more than a worker at McDonalds who's only required qualifications are to not set the building on fire and being able to say "do you want fries with that?" The sad truth is that you wouldn't find people that are successful and do no work hard even those kardashians that you seem to adore so much.

lisper 8y ago

It's true that economic conditions change with technological advances, and that the general trend is that fewer and fewer people are required to meet the demand for any particular product. It does not follow that we as a society should adopt a policy that those who manage to capture markets are entitled to a proportionate (note that I deliberately did NOT say DISproportionate) share of society's wealth. Most of our social mores were designed under the assumption that production, not consumption, was the limiting factor in our economies. But that is starting to change. If we don't change the rules to accord with this new reality it will cause serious problems. If only 1% of the world's population is required to meet 110% of the world's demand for everything (and that could very well happen within our lifetimes), what are we going to do with the remaining 99%?

dogma1138 8y ago
The problem is then what is proportionate and how do you estimate it? Should Apple be taxed more than Google? Should an actor that gets paid 10 million dollars for a movie be taxed more than an actor who’s paid 5? What if the actor that is paid 10 is has 5 times more views just in less valued markets? Should I who works as an engineer for a financial institution be taxed more than an engineer working for SpaceX or NASA?
- lisper 8y ago
  Proportionate is easy: if you're making money in the free market, then manifestly what you are making is proportionate to the value you are providing to someone. The problem is that some people's contributions measured this way are wildly disproportionate to other people's contributions. A movie star really is providing orders of magnitude more value than a McDonalds cashier. The question is: should a movie star therefore be entitled to orders of magnitude more compensation? It's not clear that the answer to that really ought to be "yes".
  - dogma1138 8y ago
    Proportionate isn't clear, again don't mistake the dollar amount they pay in taxes with their tax, while we cap taxation for a good reason as progressive upto 100% is a very bad idea. And yes it is clear to anyone who studied economics, and more importantly it's really depressing that you are using these populist arguments how about replacing the movie star with a doctor? Is it ok we pay a doctor who spent the better part of the first 30 years of their life becoming one and would spend the next 30-40 years being one more than a worker at McDonalds who's only required qualifications are to not set the building on fire and being able to say "do you want fries with that?" The sad truth is that you wouldn't find people that are successful and do no work hard even those kardashians that you seem to adore so much.