Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

priceonomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 161 posts

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#61

Post by mrdrozdov »

netcan wrote: post #36

" that’s like asking why anyone would pay Beyoncé or the Beatles a million dollars just to play a few songs " This almost feels like playing dumb. The fact that a legitimate public speaking economy exists and has a dynamic which is not based on payola does not mean that a dirtier side does not. Like other pieces of the money-in-politics puzzle there are legitimate, non-corrupt reasons to hand powerful people 6 figure…

> The rewards to attracting the right people in the corporate world can more than justify a six-figure speech. Hedge funds often invite potential clients to events featuring prominent speakers. As one hedge fund manager has explained, if just one client “decides to invest $10 million… the firm will snag a 2 percent management fee—which works out to $200,000” per year.

This on the other hand seems like a very legitimate explanation and parallels the logic behind paying speakers to attend large tech events (like one Salesforce might have, which is mentioned elsewhere in the article).

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#62

Post by puppetmaster3 »

mdemare wrote: post #59
ramblenode wrote: post #40

> In the case of politicians like Hillary Clinton, many observers see a more sinister explanation for how a speech can be worth $225,000: the speech is buying political influence. > It’s impossible to say exactly how much the desire to influence politicians inflates their speaking fees. Goldman is, as with all their investments, expecting a positive return. I'm not sure why this is presented as some kind of alternati…

They already received their positive return. By paying Hillary for her speeches, they blocked her from credibly moving to the left on financial reform to fend off Sanders.

Do we know who canceled Glass–Steagall?

And after it was removed, how much tax payers paid to GS and such in '08, what was the rough figure?

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#63

Post by jomamaxx »

tacomonstrous wrote: post #50
jomamaxx wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Hillary Clinton: A) Is running for President B) Is married to an ex-President, and the most influential man in the world. C) Has a $500M slush-fund into which money from nefarious places is being invested - and it's not controlled by campaign spending laws. D) Money was given to her from individuals (more than 50% of them) that she was dealing with as Sec of State - which is a massive conflict of interest on…

What is this slush fund? Who gave her money when she was Sec of State? Please substantiate these assertions.

The Clinton Foundation is supposed to be a charity but they spend almost nothing on charity - their expenses are 'conferences', trips, meetings - basically Bill and Hillary's personal expense account for things they cannot bill to the government or some other sponsor. Also, they can make ads that promote 'narrative' and the 'personal brand' of Hillary.

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#64

Post by saalweachter »

douche wrote: post #57
tacomonstrous wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is this slush fund? Who gave her money when she was Sec of State? Please substantiate these assertions.

The Clinton Foundation is a slush fund. I spent a higher percentage of my income on actual charity than they have in recent years.

You've spent over 88% of your income[1] on charity? That's awesome, keep up the good work!

[1] https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillar...

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#65

Post by gtirloni »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #44

I am neither a liberal nor a conservative. I'm a libertarian, so I really don't want any of the major U.S. presidential candidates to win. But some of my political friends in both the right and left have a phrase I was reminded of while reading this article. It's "Vox-splaining" The idea is that certain news outlets or articles exist based on the premise that those dumb voters! What they really just need is a patient…

Brazilian politicians have recently "discovered" the "benefits" of paid speeches too. A famous ex-president used to charge north of $200k USD saying that's what international speakers like Clinton charge, so he ought to be allowed to do the same. Evidence is mounting this was a venue for converting bribes into legal money, or to buy influence from the Brazilian state machine.

Funny anecdote: he was once paid such amount to speak to a audience of workers from a beer factory. After arriving, he basically drank a pint of beer in front of everyone, said some funny jokes and disappeared into the offices to discuss "business". That was a speech and he damn well charges what he wants for that, that was the explanation.

It amazes me that these people, having reached their peak in social influence and often in their bank accounts, can pretend to justify speeches as a revenue source. If they are so concerned with making the world a better place, they could charge just their expenses and maybe a modest fee to pay their bills. Hell, I'm sure most famous decent people would do it for free if it's really a good cause.

Completely agree, it feels bad, it smells bad... If you have any ethics, you know it's bad and you don't engage in such shenanigans.

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#67

Post by dorfsmay »

feklar wrote: post #5

This is how RMS has made a living for 2 decades. One advantage to attending these is being able to briefly talk to the speaker afterwards if they stick around, like asking RMS about his papers in the 1970s about propagation, dependencies and backtracking for building large-scale symbolic systems.

Unless it has changed recently, RMS asks for all his fees to be paid, and does not ask for a fee but makes it clear that one is appreciated and that if no speaking fee is paid, he's essentially given the speech for free. My experience is that organisations and people inviting him to speak do pay him, but in the thousands of dollars, similarly to what you'd pay a high end consultant to spend a day or two to travel and work ; not high tens of thousand and certainly not hundreds of thousands dollars!

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#68

Post by ethanbond »

tiler wrote: post #56
netcan wrote: post #36

" that’s like asking why anyone would pay Beyoncé or the Beatles a million dollars just to play a few songs " This almost feels like playing dumb. The fact that a legitimate public speaking economy exists and has a dynamic which is not based on payola does not mean that a dirtier side does not. Like other pieces of the money-in-politics puzzle there are legitimate, non-corrupt reasons to hand powerful people 6 figure…

Ehh. Hilary Clinton is far more powerful than the people that invite her to give speeches. More than likely this is a way for a business interest to pay tribute in the hopes that someday she might remember their fealty.

Ummm, yes. A lot of people think that's a problem. That's called corruption. Do you not?

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#69

Post by coldtea »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #55
coldtea wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OK, so why are such articles only written for hillary? As opposed to who? Trump? Aren't enough negative articles also written for Trump? Besides he is so rich that he doesn't needed "meagre" 250K speeches to influence him -- he probably has voting favors for his business partners and his own business interests pre-planned already. > Why are you so adamantly opposed to Hillary's practices when it is so incredibly co…

Wow that is world-class naiveté. Female politicians of every stripe are bullied daily. This is business as usual for half of our population. And its compounded by guys constantly replying "Hey it isn't happening to me; I don't see it so it must not exist".

I don't see politicians as male or female and could not care less what sex they are. Are they fit for office is the real question.

Female politicians are just hit with some special charges related to their sex. But male and female politicians are hit with all kinds of shit all the time. Compared to the avalanche of accusations that go to both, having some special accusations because you're a woman politician is not much. Plus, in the current PC climate, most respected outlets don't do that at all -- it's down to the "yellow press" so to speak to do that.

(Besides most, if not all, deserve to be called all kinds of shit anyway, as they are crappy politicians, male or female).

Re: Why Do Famous People Get Paid $250k to Give a Speech?

#70

Post by jomamaxx »

saalweachter wrote: post #64
douche wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Clinton Foundation is a slush fund. I spent a higher percentage of my income on actual charity than they have in recent years.

You've spent over 88% of your income[1] on charity? That's awesome, keep up the good work! [1] https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillar...

Ha ha ... the Clinton Foundation is an 'operating foundation' - which means it doesn't give it's money away like other charities. So - if this was like the 'Christian Children's Fund' - than that 88% would be 88% of the money goes to Haiti or wherever, with 12% overhead.

The 'Clinton Fund' doesn't give any money away, the operate their own missions and programs - meaning that - of that 88% , any amount can go to 'consultants' 'lawyers' 'research' 'friends' 'conferences' etc.. And it does. That's a lot of money to spend - and 100% of those people work directly for Clinton Corp..

Post reply on HN