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

I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

thecut.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 187 posts

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#71

Post by isostatic »

Brotkrumen wrote: post #57
smadge wrote: post #44

“One thing that’s surprisingly inexpensive for a lot of our clients is health insurance. The insurance policy for members of SAG-AFTRA is amazing. For the money, it is the best health insurance out there. It’s only about $400 per quarter for an individual, so you’re looking at about $1,200 or $1,500 a year for the best PPO coverage in the country. It travels with you everywhere, and you have access to emergency care…

There has to be a catch. Maybe high copays? 1500$ a year is ridiculously cheap

Typical health care costs in developed countries is on the $3k-$5k per person per year range [0]

(The U.S. is nearly $10k a year)

However, on average the U.S. government (thus taxpayer) funds half of the health care costs, meaning that the private sector has to fund about $5k per person per year. That would suggest the SAG employer is paying $3500 a year and the SAG employee $1500 a year.

[0] https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#72

Post by thaumasiotes »

holman wrote: post #17

If any of this is at all interesting to you, I'd recommend checking out the very excellent ESPN documentary "Broke": http://www.espn.com/30for30/film?page=broke ESPN's 30 for 30 docs are really great, even if you're not particularly huge into sports. Broke is one of my favorites (after a "The Two Escobars"). It goes into a lot of detail about how ill-prepared many professional athletes are for the lifestyle, how they…

> there's a lot of heartbreaking instances where people did the right thing and still ended up bankrupt.

What exactly do you mean by "doing the right thing" here?

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#73

Post by Retric »

elgenie wrote: post #34

The US does a terrible job of inculcating basic financial literacy in the populace. The only way that paying someone 5% of assets / income just to avoid ruination can be a sound investment is if the person is utterly clueless about how money in general, and compound interest in particular, works.

Depends on how much work these people put in. If they are going over every contract including insurance etc it would be an extremely valuable service.

On to of that they are sorting all their mail, doing bill payments etc. 'I was at his house every single day, helping to oversee contractors, pick out windows, pick out drapes.'

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#74

Post by isostatic »

iamtew wrote: post #31

The cookie wall won't let me continue without agreeing to cookies. I can reject them in the Cookie Policy, but that too is protected behind the cookie wall. Obviously, this doesn't comply with the GDPR, and makes the site unreadable for some.

This article loads just fine without needed any cookies, just curl it (via a US server) and load it. If that works, why do they need to set any cookies? Some sites need session cookies to maintain login details from request to request, that's fine. Some sites may offer the option to use cookies to save your login from one visit to the next, that's also fine, ask if they want that.

Most sites don't need to set any cookies though, so why bother asking permission.

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#75

Post by Cthulhu_ »

Fradow wrote: post #46
zeta0134 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the data collection management would traditionally be stored as a cookie... It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Without tracking, how do you track that consent was revoked? The cookie law bugs me because it's feels like it's being applied in completely the wrong place. Isn't the browser perfectly capable of restricting third party cookies and presenting the necessary legal warnings?

The cookie law has exemptions for cookies that are there for technical reasons. For example, your locale, and which cookies you agreed to. The browser cannot differentiate first party cookies that are technical or for tracking.

^ this; people for some reason still assume all cookies are banned. If that was so, it'd be a feature removed from browsers already.

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#76

Post by gadders »

zer00eyz wrote: post #3

A long time ago, in a job (thankfully) far far away I had to have a fair bit of interaction with famous people. Some of them are crazy - one of the artists (now dead) demanded "more goat heads" on his project. This was an actual client request. I still do take pride in getting one of the most difficult clients in the roster to admit we did a "good job". Famous people can be weird, and some do really exist in their ow…

I had a friend who worked as a concierge for an ultra-rich family, and didn't like the toll it took on his personality. He said "The attitude is contagious, but sadly the money isn't."

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#77

Post by carlmr »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #51
smadge wrote: post #44

“One thing that’s surprisingly inexpensive for a lot of our clients is health insurance. The insurance policy for members of SAG-AFTRA is amazing. For the money, it is the best health insurance out there. It’s only about $400 per quarter for an individual, so you’re looking at about $1,200 or $1,500 a year for the best PPO coverage in the country. It travels with you everywhere, and you have access to emergency care…

> It really shows how us Plebians are ground into dust by the healthcare industry Or the benefits of collective bargaining, even in limited context like procuring healthcare.

This is one of things I always wonder about. Libertarians and other free-market enthusiasts should actually be for collective bargaining and unions. Because in an actual free market it's legal to form unions, just like it's legal to form a corporation.

Collective bargaining is a feature of a free market. If you don't like the idea of unions and collective bargaining, you don't like free markets.

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#78

Post by lentil_soup »

elgenie wrote: post #34

The US does a terrible job of inculcating basic financial literacy in the populace. The only way that paying someone 5% of assets / income just to avoid ruination can be a sound investment is if the person is utterly clueless about how money in general, and compound interest in particular, works.

Not only the US. I've see that in many other places. Is there a place where financial literacy is part of school?

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#79

Post by rorykoehler »

carlmr wrote: post #77
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It really shows how us Plebians are ground into dust by the healthcare industry Or the benefits of collective bargaining, even in limited context like procuring healthcare.

This is one of things I always wonder about. Libertarians and other free-market enthusiasts should actually be for collective bargaining and unions. Because in an actual free market it's legal to form unions, just like it's legal to form a corporation. Collective bargaining is a feature of a free market. If you don't like the idea of unions and collective bargaining, you don't like free markets.

Actual libertarians rather than the confused type so popular in the US are all for it. Look at anarcho-syndacilists for example

Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money

#80

Post by RA_Fisher »

rorykoehler wrote: post #79
carlmr wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of things I always wonder about. Libertarians and other free-market enthusiasts should actually be for collective bargaining and unions. Because in an actual free market it's legal to form unions, just like it's legal to form a corporation. Collective bargaining is a feature of a free market. If you don't like the idea of unions and collective bargaining, you don't like free markets.

Actual libertarians rather than the confused type so popular in the US are all for it. Look at anarcho-syndacilists for example

Yep. Though we're a rare breed I'll admit, I'm an American libertarian and I'm supportive of unions and collective bargaining.

I have a caveat in that I don't support laws that interfere with such bargaining or artificially increase one party's market power (closed shop laws). In the US this identifies me as being "right to work" which is often seen as anti-union.

For example I don't support the UAW due to their long history of using the state to increase their market power.

Post reply on HN