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

The realities of being a pop star

itscharlibb.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 249 posts

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#231

Post by pinkmuffinere »

toast0 wrote: post #216
pinkmuffinere wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your average NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL athletes are broke 5 years after they are out of the league. Fame, is mostly a curse. I'm not familiar with the financials of music / media production (I didn't read the linked article yet, sorry). But I feel this over-pitying attitude towards professional sports players is misplaced. They do often go broke after their career. That is sad. It is also completely avoidable with _very_…

> Spend (a lot) less than you make. At 500k/year anywhere in the US, you should easily be saving 200k / year. $500k/year sounds like a lot, but that's enough that taxes are going to take a large bite. Only the biggest stars can get their income deferred beyond their career. Because of the nature of the job, you're going to have larger housing costs: when you get traded, you need to find somewhere to live quickly and…

I think we’re mostly agreeing, but I feel this is a little misleading:

> $500k/year sounds like a lot, but that's enough that taxes are going to take a large bite.

It seems to imply that taxes are going to make the $500k income life surprisingly hard, but let’s do the math. In California, with $500k income, your effective taxation rate is 41%, looking here: https://smartasset.com/taxes/california-tax-calculator#M0SXJ.... So you’re going to take home about $300k after tax!! I think that’s still _so much money_. I would struggle to spend that even if I tried to. Ya, the taxes are higher. But it’s not that big of an issue, once you’re making a ton of money it just doesn’t hurt much. That’s why graduated tax rates are tolerable to begin with, imo.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#232

Post by rufus_foreman »

low_tech_love wrote: post #170

Say what you will about this piece, I didn’t detect any AI in it and for that I thank Charli. I’ve been desperately for any original thoughts whatever that come out of a human being’s brain and in that sense it was an interesting read. However the real pearl was the link to Lou Reed’s interview, what a gem! It got me into a rabbit hole of watching Lou Reed making “fun” of obnoxious journalists on YouTube and I haven’…

That wasn't the only time Lou Reed did performance art for the Australian press, the other one is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx-mH9ZjnuM.

"Are you happier as a brunette?"

"Uh...are you happier as a schmuck?"

...

"You like doing things you don't like?"

"Yeah. That's a paradox isn't it?"

I believe I listened to Charli XCX music once, my girlfriend has grandchildren. Not really my thing, but it's great that people are still being influenced by those interviews.

I still listen to the Velvet Underground all the time, but if I listen to Lou Reed's solo stuff, it's either Walk On the Wild Side or those interviews.

Maybe "The Kids" from Berlin once in a while.

And "Sweet Jane" depending on whether you consider Loaded as a VU album.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#233

Post by Gunax »

brabel wrote: post #153

> We are still trained to hate women, to hate ourselves and to be angry at women if they step out of the neat little box that public perception has put them in. I really don’t see this. Female singers seem to be enjoying about as much freedom to do and act in whatever way they please as it’s possible without basically letting them get away with criminal behavior… and even then many openly talk about doing drugs and o…

I always thought this was applied to all celebrities as a way to feel superior. But, I am not really sure.

Normal people despise being lectured by celebrities about social or political issues.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#234

Post by toast0 »

pinkmuffinere wrote: post #231
toast0 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Spend (a lot) less than you make. At 500k/year anywhere in the US, you should easily be saving 200k / year. $500k/year sounds like a lot, but that's enough that taxes are going to take a large bite. Only the biggest stars can get their income deferred beyond their career. Because of the nature of the job, you're going to have larger housing costs: when you get traded, you need to find somewhere to live quickly and…

I think we’re mostly agreeing, but I feel this is a little misleading: > $500k/year sounds like a lot, but that's enough that taxes are going to take a large bite. It seems to imply that taxes are going to make the $500k income life surprisingly hard, but let’s do the math. In California, with $500k income, your effective taxation rate is 41%, looking here: https://smartasset.com/taxes/california-tax-calculator#M0SXJ…

$300k net and you want them to save $200k. $100k net goes a long way, but they're probably renting at least two places, a lot of eating away from home (much of which I'm sure gets covered by the team, but probably not all of it) a lot of excess transportation. Excess tax prep cause of all the working in multiple jurisdictions, etc. Things will add up; thankfully I have all the coordination of a newspaper so I don't have to deal with the accounting problems ;p

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#235

Post by pinkmuffinere »

toast0 wrote: post #234
pinkmuffinere wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we’re mostly agreeing, but I feel this is a little misleading: > $500k/year sounds like a lot, but that's enough that taxes are going to take a large bite. It seems to imply that taxes are going to make the $500k income life surprisingly hard, but let’s do the math. In California, with $500k income, your effective taxation rate is 41%, looking here: https://smartasset.com/taxes/california-tax-calculator#M0SXJ…

$300k net and you want them to save $200k. $100k net goes a long way, but they're probably renting at least two places, a lot of eating away from home (much of which I'm sure gets covered by the team, but probably not all of it) a lot of excess transportation. Excess tax prep cause of all the working in multiple jurisdictions, etc. Things will add up; thankfully I have all the coordination of a newspaper so I don't h…

Idk, maybe I’m out of touch, i still think 100k for loving expenses is more than enough. A nice apartment in Mountainview is like $3500-$4000/month. If you have to rent two apartments, presumably you’re not renting both in such an expensive area. I’d think housing can be covered by 60k/year pretty comfortably.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#236

Post by deanCommie »

bigiain wrote: post #66
pinkmuffinere wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your average NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL athletes are broke 5 years after they are out of the league. Fame, is mostly a curse. I'm not familiar with the financials of music / media production (I didn't read the linked article yet, sorry). But I feel this over-pitying attitude towards professional sports players is misplaced. They do often go broke after their career. That is sad. It is also completely avoidable with _very_…

You're right, of course. But often there are obvious and "easy" answers that are anything but easy for the person who needs those answers. "Just cheer up, depressed person!" "Just eat less and exercise more, fat person!" "Just stop shooting up, heroin addict!" "Don't accept generic lifestyle creep, pro athlete who's teammates are all living it up like they live in a gangsta rap music video!" I'm sure there are lots o…

I think there's an even simpler point that people who make fun of athletes for blowing their paychecks instead of saving them miss:

* These are elite athletes at the top of their pyramid, which means they have an absolutely bonikers elite competitive drive that got them where they had so far.

They were probably the best player on every team they've been since kindergarten. They've made it to the top of the pyramid and most want to keep going. Championships, all-stars, MVPs, all of these are things they are USED to getting at every level so far, and they want to keep going.

So when they sign there $X00,000 rookie deal they're not thinking "OK how do i save the most of this for my retirement", they're thinking "how do i get $Y,000,000 deal next? And the $WZ,000,000 deal after that?" And of course then I'll be set for life, and it will be easy to save and retire cuz i'll be rich.

This is just human nature.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#237

Post by nickpp »

BrandoElFollito wrote: post #214
WalterBright wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Hitler declared war on the US, Hitler was allied with Japan, and Hitler was sinking American shipping.

Yes, in the case of WW2 this is a "defense" war. But the next ones were not. My comment was general - I am French and we send our army mostly to Africa to secure our sources of various minerals. Or to Asia in the 70s. We did not go to Iraq but that would have been another fight for oil (this time). Western countries have not been attacked since WW2, but it also have been busy (same as the US)

> Western countries have not been attacked since WW2

Mostly because they've sold out, at Yalta, the Eastern countries as a "buffer zone" to protect them from the orcs. Even today, Ukraine's heroic people are dying daily so that Westerners can enjoy their morning Starbucks PSLs.

The few sacrifices you made were also in your own long-term interest. Imagine the blood-thirsty Russia using Africa's people and its resources for war: life in the west wouldn't be that peaceful and comfortable anymore.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#238

Post by olelele »

rufus_foreman wrote: post #232
low_tech_love wrote: post #170

Say what you will about this piece, I didn’t detect any AI in it and for that I thank Charli. I’ve been desperately for any original thoughts whatever that come out of a human being’s brain and in that sense it was an interesting read. However the real pearl was the link to Lou Reed’s interview, what a gem! It got me into a rabbit hole of watching Lou Reed making “fun” of obnoxious journalists on YouTube and I haven’…

That wasn't the only time Lou Reed did performance art for the Australian press, the other one is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx-mH9ZjnuM . "Are you happier as a brunette?" "Uh...are you happier as a schmuck?" ... "You like doing things you don't like?" "Yeah. That's a paradox isn't it?" I believe I listened to Charli XCX music once, my girlfriend has grandchildren. Not really my thing, but it's great that peo…

Transformer and the early live stuff are all so so good. Metal machine music was my first real noise record.. :)

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#239

Post by rldjbpin »

ivraatiems wrote: post #21

There is a weird assumption people make that somebody as successful as Charli XCX isn't smart because her persona is "I like cocaine and partying," and then are surprised when she can express herself like this. Like she says: "Another thing about being a pop star is that you cannot avoid the fact that some people are simply determined to prove that you are stupid." Making music at any professional level is extremely…

> There is a weird assumption people make that somebody as successful as Charli XCX isn't smart because her persona is "I like cocaine and partying," and then are surprised when she can express herself like this.

after all, it takes a smart guy to play dumb. artists do portray a persona, or are encouraged by labels. at the same time we cannot blame others for buying it or making their own assumptions.

from first look about the book club podcast, it seems great that one reads a book and gets to talk directly with its author.

Re: The realities of being a pop star

#240

Post by whamlastxmas »

It's unfortunate to see her have a lot of self awareness of her status and what she represents in part (capitalism), but when it comes to asking herself why some people have a negative knee jerk reaction to her presence, she falls back to "it's because I'm a woman". Which to be fair I am positive happens and frequently. But I would be shocked if it wasn't more commonly because she's rich and famous and lives a life of hedonism (her words). She even touches on this when she describes entering through back entrances and the staff probably hating her. She represents the same feeling we have about trust fund babies. They have a ridiculous fun, easy, rewarding life, and meanwhile then waiter is cleaning baby vomit off the ground for $20 an hour after tips.
Post reply on HN