English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

9 answers

Just like any business in a free enterprise system, the service providers are paid exactly what the market commands.

I certainly think that the athletes and entertainers are more worthy of the lions share of the money that they bring in than are the team owners or the entertainment lawyers.

2006-12-18 09:22:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I'm a stunt woman and actress. You have to understand that those few commercials you get is your entire years worth of pay and residual income.

A 9 to 5 job has a cap on it in which you have to show up every single day of the business week to get paid exactly what your boss tells you that you are worth. Celebrities and Athletes are independent contractors and do not "work for" someone else.

For us actors who are not famous but seen on commercials, we can make an entire years pay that is equivelant to a six figure salary with a few International commercials. We do not work every single day. That's why the money that "seems" overpaid is not that much money to us who do not get a ton of union jobs.

I am not famous. I represent the majority of the Screen Actors Guild members who would not survive financially if it were not for the high based pay and ongoing residual income.

As far as your question about celebrities and athletes being overpaid. They are their own business owner, not working for some boss. They represent more than a commodity. They represent an industry or are part of a corporation that "rents" them as long as they are in demand.

There is so much abundance in this world that what they get does not create lack for someone else. In fact, they create jobs by reinvesting their money into assets like more production companies around the world. These production companies hire camera people, grips, second assistant directors, PA's, construction workers, set builders, designers, story board artists, promoters, architects, engineers etc...

For athletes, it draws people to the stadiums and forums where athletes come to play... which creates more jobs, like vendors, promoters, and more revenue for the local restaurants and shops and the city.

Another advantage to becoming wealthy is that they are able to donate larger portions of money to the less fortunate. The more they donate to the less fortunate, the faster they are making a difference in the world. You can read positive information on how these celebrities and athletes are very giving of their time and money to the less fortunate, you just won't find it in the tabloids, because they are just gossip.

Even if in some very rare instant they didn't have the heart to donate, they "have to" for tax reasons. Paris Hilton gives millions fo breast cancer research.

Hope this helps.

2006-12-18 09:33:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

You are paid exactly what you deserved and if you don't believe that, then put yourself on the open market.
In the case of athletes and entertainers, there's much price elasticity because of the uniqueness in their skills and ability.
Also, the brand they create is a reflection of their character and values and people want to associate with successful people and therefore are happy to pay a higher price.
Athletes and entertainers should be paid in direct proporiton of value they bring into the marketplace...

2006-12-18 09:21:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

My opinion, they should have a limit. They get paid way too much money and some of them don't put it to good use. Should give some to charity.

They are role models for kids and some of them over abuse their money status and get into trouble. They need to donate some of their earnings to charity.

2006-12-18 15:57:50 · answer #4 · answered by Trese 5 · 0 1

absolutley, they would probably do it anyways for much less money just to be famous. teachers should be paid so much more, after all, they educate the future, and if the furutre isn't educated, the country would collapse. we would all be going to the dogs, if we aren't already...

2006-12-18 09:27:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It's the law of supply and demand. You get paid what people are willing to pay you.

2006-12-18 09:25:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Would you think that it was right to put a cap on what you earn? They earn that much because they generate ALLOT of cash.

2006-12-18 09:23:20 · answer #7 · answered by Today is the Day 4 · 1 0

They should be paid minimum wage because they are a dime a dozen.

2006-12-18 09:20:53 · answer #8 · answered by MsFancy 4 · 0 2

It will all stop when they stop going to the movies or games.

2016-09-19 06:26:15 · answer #9 · answered by John Days 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers