3 ms·

No, of course not. Actors, sports stars and high frequency traders are. (I guess my post should have read "earned income"). Edit: actually my post does refere

by jqm 12y ago

No, of course not. Actors, sports stars and high frequency traders are. (I guess my post should have read "earned income"). Edit: actually my post does reference earning rather than simply collecting. Unemployed and those on welfare don't earn. So what is your point exactly?

dredmorbius 12y ago
While they're trotted out by the kleptocrats, actors and athletes in general aren't of the super-rich. * "Starving actor" is pretty much a trope. Superstars are rare, though they do again tend to display a winner-take-all (or much) tendency. Even successful actors often struggle once their careers are over. For actresses, that's not infrequently by their mid-30s, though there's some longevity being evidenced now. Perhaps 50-something is the new 30-something. Similarly with athletes. Success is rare, and careers are often very brief. Consequences (especially in contact sports) are also high -- American football players have notoriously low life expectancy. The other element is that the negative product of actors and athletes is pretty low. OK, perhaps energy and resource utilization extravagance in coverage of their work by hack writers, but that's about it. They're not destroying companies, felling tropical rainforests, or invading countries. If you're particularly unlucky, they may give a popular face to a hideous ideology (say, Mel Gibson or wartime propoganda of numerous stripes). A few gambling problems and wrecked marriages, but the same can come of dice, cards, or drink rather more readily. ________________________________ * Clarification: nor do they comprise a significant portion of the super-rich. If you look at the Forbes 400, very few of the entries are even associated with entertainment. From the 2011 list, I find, searching for "Television", "Entertainment", and "Movies": Key: Rank:Name:Wealth:Age:City:Source 78:Saban, Haim:2,800:60:Beverly Hills, CA:Television 83:Spielberg, Steven Allen:2,700:58:Pacific Palisades, CA:Movies 235:Winfrey, Oprah:1,400:51:Chicago, IL:Television 320:Siegel, Herbert:1,100:77:New York, NY:Television 375:Sillerman, Robert FX:975:57:New York, NY:Entertainment One is an actor (in any significant fashion). Haim Saban: businessman / financier, record, film, & TV producer. Steven Spielberg is, of course, a director. Oprah Winfrey is a television and media celebrity and owner. Herbert Siegel is better known as Herbert "Herb" Ellis, a character actor, known for portrayals of law enforcement officers on film and TV. He helped create Dragnet, Joe Friday, Room Five, The D.A.'s Man, and Peter Gunn. Ah, and two listings under sports: 164:Kroenke, E Stanley:1,800:58:Columbia, MO:Sports, real estate 346:Jacobs, Jeremy Maurice Sr:1,000:65:East Aurora, NY:Sports concessions Kroenke owns the LA Rams. Jacobs owns the Boston Bruins. Neither is a professional athlete.
- jqm 12y ago
  Well, you make a good point and I speak half in jest regarding athletes and actors.(Although famous actors do make a lot of money). I guess I just noticed this a long time ago in large companies. A guy at the top makes a lot of money. He often provides a symbolic role, a bit of (often bad) strategy, much ass covering, credit taking, bus pushing and ladder climbing... but the real services the company provides are actually carried out by people making much less. So... I maintain, that the actual importance to society of task performed is often inversely correlated with earning.

by jqm 12y ago

dredmorbius 12y ago

While they're trotted out by the kleptocrats, actors and athletes in general aren't of the super-rich. * "Starving actor" is pretty much a trope. Superstars are rare, though they do again tend to display a winner-take-all (or much) tendency. Even successful actors often struggle once their careers are over. For actresses, that's not infrequently by their mid-30s, though there's some longevity being evidenced now. Perhaps 50-something is the new 30-something. Similarly with athletes. Success is rare, and careers are often very brief. Consequences (especially in contact sports) are also high -- American football players have notoriously low life expectancy. The other element is that the negative product of actors and athletes is pretty low. OK, perhaps energy and resource utilization extravagance in coverage of their work by hack writers, but that's about it. They're not destroying companies, felling tropical rainforests, or invading countries. If you're particularly unlucky, they may give a popular face to a hideous ideology (say, Mel Gibson or wartime propoganda of numerous stripes). A few gambling problems and wrecked marriages, but the same can come of dice, cards, or drink rather more readily. ________________________________ * Clarification: nor do they comprise a significant portion of the super-rich. If you look at the Forbes 400, very few of the entries are even associated with entertainment. From the 2011 list, I find, searching for "Television", "Entertainment", and "Movies": Key: Rank:Name:Wealth:Age:City:Source 78:Saban, Haim:2,800:60:Beverly Hills, CA:Television 83:Spielberg, Steven Allen:2,700:58:Pacific Palisades, CA:Movies 235:Winfrey, Oprah:1,400:51:Chicago, IL:Television 320:Siegel, Herbert:1,100:77:New York, NY:Television 375:Sillerman, Robert FX:975:57:New York, NY:Entertainment One is an actor (in any significant fashion). Haim Saban: businessman / financier, record, film, & TV producer. Steven Spielberg is, of course, a director. Oprah Winfrey is a television and media celebrity and owner. Herbert Siegel is better known as Herbert "Herb" Ellis, a character actor, known for portrayals of law enforcement officers on film and TV. He helped create Dragnet, Joe Friday, Room Five, The D.A.'s Man, and Peter Gunn. Ah, and two listings under sports: 164:Kroenke, E Stanley:1,800:58:Columbia, MO:Sports, real estate 346:Jacobs, Jeremy Maurice Sr:1,000:65:East Aurora, NY:Sports concessions Kroenke owns the LA Rams. Jacobs owns the Boston Bruins. Neither is a professional athlete.

jqm 12y ago
Well, you make a good point and I speak half in jest regarding athletes and actors.(Although famous actors do make a lot of money). I guess I just noticed this a long time ago in large companies. A guy at the top makes a lot of money. He often provides a symbolic role, a bit of (often bad) strategy, much ass covering, credit taking, bus pushing and ladder climbing... but the real services the company provides are actually carried out by people making much less. So... I maintain, that the actual importance to society of task performed is often inversely correlated with earning.