[deleted]
I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
101–110 of 187 posts
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can assure you that the majority of SAG actors are working service jobs, living hand to mouth. This isn't an example of the rich lording over the plebs, this is an example of a union doing right by its members.
Yeah. All tech workers could have similar benefits if they unionized en masse using a structure similar to that of actors.
And actually tech workers have a lot of similarities to those in entertainment (both front and back of house) larger numbers of nerodiverse members than the population at large for example.
The Biggest tech union on the UK just merged with BECTU (the eqvielent of IATSE)
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#103The 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.
Here's an archived copy without the nag screen:
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#104Thought this bit was interesting: "... actors, recording artists, producers, writers, and athletes with personal net worths ranging from $1 million to $50 million..." I kind of feel bad for the low end of her clients whose net worth is only $1 million. Don't get me wrong, it's a lot of money. But it also doesn't go that far nowadays, especially if you live in SF Bay area (though most of her clients are probably in th…
You normally ignore your first home in these sort of calculations.
Even a TV series regular doesn't get a huge amount (when compared to a google engineer) at first - and they normally sign for 5 years
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#105The 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.'
I think she also meant but didn't say stopped contractors ripping her client off.
Charging for Italian Marble but actually using crap materials or billing for more days worked than they did would be a couple of good examples.
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#106Earlier 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.
I support free markets because they tend to distribute scarce resources efficiently, and monopoly disrupts that. A union is, roughly, an attempt to form a monopoly and charge a price above the market price, which our first expectation should lead us to think will cause a deadweight loss and drop in employment, although there will be some rents to the workers that keep their jobs which of course is why they are trying to do it.
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#107Earlier 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
^ This. The only thing that I really have against unions is that so many make it difficult to get a job where they operate, and on the flip side, require membership to work at a given employer. If a union's benefits are so good (and they often are) then there shouldn't be a need to put people in against their will.
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#108“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…
I can assure you that the majority of SAG actors are working service jobs, living hand to mouth. This isn't an example of the rich lording over the plebs, this is an example of a union doing right by its members.
When I compare that to German health insurance, it comes out to an income of ~1600 EUR per month before taxes, but you pay more of if you earn more.
Quite an interesting concept though that their rates don't seem to up no matter if you just get by or make millions...
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#109Earlier 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.
I support free markets because they tend to distribute scarce resources efficiently, and monopoly disrupts that. A union is, roughly, an attempt to form a monopoly and charge a price above the market price, which our first expectation should lead us to think will cause a deadweight loss and drop in employment, although there will be some rents to the workers that keep their jobs which of course is why they are trying…
That's true if you have a free market, but the healthcare market is not free due to supply restrictions (can't make new doctors easily), demand restrictions (employer or government bears most of the cost, but patients are consuming healthcare services), and complex regulatory things that increase overhead. So an idealogically pure libertarian would argue that unions are bad, but a more pragmatic libertarian could argue that unions are bad overall, but might help address some of the current problems with the healthcare system.
Re: I Stop Celebrities from Blowing Their Money
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Half-baked techie workaround: private browsing?
private browsing with no cookies allowed = same issue :( The "web" is so much broken with cookies disabled... (techcrunch, any 'large' news site - except the Guardian!)
Sure, but I feel you're ignoring my point.
Enable cookies and use a private browsing session. The cookies disappear when you're done reading. What's lost?