do you think that FAMOUS hollywood PEOPLE HAVE AN OBLIGATION to do much more for those who are sufferering?

Question

so i heard today that eva longoria is acting like a total A, by having a body guard fly first class with a wedding cake to france....when i say first class, i mean first class...like the cake on a seat, and this is going to cost her 15 grand....

there is suffering not only across the ocean, but i'm sure, miles away from them, but they spend/waste money senselessly...

this is only one dumb example of the wastefulness of these people...i know that they work hard for what they have, etc..but, i do think that due to the fact that their fame and fortune primarily exists due to the public interest in them, they should have a greater moral obligation to give back...



am i the only one who thinks way?

Answer 1

Obviously, lots of people agree.

I'm not one of them.

If you make giving an 'obligation' then it ceases to have meaning. And if you take back a larger percentage because YOU have decided what is 'enough' and what is 'too much' then you reduce the incentive to work and create.

besides, you have NO idea what some of these people do behind the scenes. You are only aware of the giving that their PUBLICISTS make known.

If you think the celebs make too much, stop buying the movies/music/books etc. Stop watching their shows, going to their concerts, buying the tabloids to read about them .. Celebrities don't make themselves. WE make them.

Taking control of wealth and prosperity to spread it around more equally .. didn't we spend decades fighting against that?

Answer 2

They aren't OBLIGATED, but they should. Celebrities have a LOT of influence over other people. Even though it's sad, there are people out there who will do anything if a celebrity says it's cool. So why don't celebrities start advertising that donating to charity is cool? Is that too "boring" for them?

Why don't celebrities step up and do their part? Everyone knows they have the money. Ellen DeGeneres donated, what, $100,000 or something like that to the childrens' schools in Africa. Love her or hate her, she did a great thing. Angelina Jolie does, too, by spending time in Africa with the children and donating money to all those causes.

And adopting children? I don't care if it's Angelina and Brad, Madonna... whoever. Adopting children is fantastic, whether you're a celebrity or not. [I'm only pointing this out because they inspired more people to adopt children, which is great.] Why can't more celebrities be like them?!

It's too bad that celebrities and rich people around the world feel that they are so far above everyone financially, they need to disregard all the people suffering in the world. All they need are their fancy mansions and their weekly million-dollar vacations to be happy. Pathetic.

We "normal" people may not have as much money or fame, but at least we give our time and effort to the things that matter. Step up, celebrities, do your part.

Answer 3

Well I think ALL of us rich or not could do more to help out people in need. If not giving money then volunteering for a good cause or organizing/participating in charity events. The average American can volunteer if they cant afford to give any money. Rich people spend money on lavish things just because they can and they feel that they have worked VERY hard for thier money so they deserve some nice things. YES that is ridiculous what Eva is doing but hey thats life. A lot of people with money dont feel like they should help people who are less fortunate because they think that everyone even if they are in poverty if they really wanted to can get out of poverty. I have heard rich people say this.

Answer 4

The world would definitely be a much better place if everyone would contribute to a good cause on a regular basis. It doesn't have to be money either. It could be simple like a few hours of time spent as a mentor or something. People who are filthy rich should do more because they can.

Answer 5

No, I don't think that they are obligated. The fact that they are famous does not give us the right to expect something from them. It is really nice to always hear that a famous person has done something for someone that is less fortunate. They are making a living and getting paid extremely well, but they are not obligated to help others.

Answer 6

This is stuff that we find a waste, because we don't earn the kind of money that stars do. It is hard to imagine ever getting to the point when you would even consider buying a first class ticket for your wedding cake when you are making $10.00 an hour, but they do work hard for their money and it is theirs to spend however they choose.

Answer 7

Oh, they can all f*ck off.
I resent when they bang on about 'global issues', particularly Global Warming, yet they jet around the planet promoting their mediocre films.
John Travolta has 2 jet planes - yes, TWO, and they are there whenever he feels the need to fire up the jets and provide himself with a curry from the other side of the planet.
Quite frankly I find their feeble attempts to promote awareness of the seriousness of Global Warming just a little bit hypocritical.
I resent that sort of selfishness.

Answer 8

You're not the only one who thinks this. I'm also tired of the wealthy Hollywood folks trying to be my political advocate. I think actors/actresses should stop talking about how they do/don't support politicians and simply act. They're entertainers and not know-it-all politicians, so they should shut up and entertain. I wouldn't mind it so much if they weren't all on anti-depressants and who-knows-what other legal or illegal drugs.

Answer 9

They are not by any means obligated but out of decency they should , the things they do is just down right ridiculous at times but guess what ?? u and are responsible for them being rich and snobby

Answer 10

I think a few do a have a geniune sense of giving back like Brad and Angelina but not the majority. I believe alot of them grow into more self indulgence.