Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And without the studio head, how does the movie get made, and become available to the guy with $10 to spend on it?
Not really the point, though, is it? The studio head being rich (or, probably more precisely, well-compensated) is immaterial. Technically, he hasn't hired me, some guy 4 levels of management under him did. I'm not being hired because the studio head has a big pile of money with which to pay me. It's not his money. He's well off because he's proven himself good at picking good scripts and adept at turning them into films that the market rewards.
Actual rich people can certainly provide liquidity for enterprises to bring new products to market. (That is their most central role, as far as I'm concerned.) But eventually, an enterprise is expected to be self-sustaining.
Not really the point, though, is it? The studio head being rich (or, probably more precisely, well-compensated) is immaterial. Technically, he hasn't hired me, some guy 4 levels of management under him did. I'm not being hired because the studio head has a big pile of money with which to pay me. It's not his money. He's well off because he's proven himself good at picking good scripts and adept at turning them into films that the market rewards.
Actual rich people can certainly provide liquidity for enterprises to bring new products to market. (That is their most central role, as far as I'm concerned.) But eventually, an enterprise is expected to be self-sustaining.
Where do you think the management four levels down got the money to hire you?
Fairly obvious conclusion given the stagnant wages(despite rising productivity), wealth concentration, and monopolization trends/shrinking GDP share of small businesses.
And 51 years of a "91%" tax on the "rich" did not "trickle down" either.
Because, you know, if it had trickled down, then there would be no need for the plethora of welfare programs enacted in 1965.
I remember when Reagan was spewing the ridiculous notion of trickle down economics. I was a young teenager and was laughing at that philosophy. When did you get more money and just give it away willingly? People are greedy and don’t want to give up money and/or power.
I see you age well. Some people mature but others just get old.
In the last 50 years, Americans have immensely improved their fiscal position. capitalism and opportunity americans uniquely have in the world is the reason americans are improving their financial status.
dig for information. read source material. get facts before making assumptions or taking media's word.
Bottom Line: America’s middle class did start largely disappearing in the 1970s, but it was because they were moving up to higher-income groups, not down into a lower-income category.
middle-income households in the US are gradually moving up to higher income groups, and not down into own into lower-income groups. In 1967, only 9% of US households (only 1 in 11) earned $100,000 or more (in 2017 dollars). In 2017, more than 1 in 4 US households (29.2%) were in that high-income category, a new record high.
In other words, over the last half-century, the share of US households earning incomes of $100,000 or more (in 2017 dollars) has more than tripled!
At the same time, the share of middle-income households earning $35,000 to $100,000 (in 2017 dollars) has decreased over time, from more than half of US households in 1967 (53.8%) to less than half (only 41.3%) in 2017.
Likewise, the share of low-income households earning $35,000 or less (in 2017 dollars) has decreased from more than one-third of households in 1967 (37.2%) to below one-third of US households last year (29.5%), a near-record low!
Last edited by texan2yankee; 12-18-2020 at 06:17 PM..
Minimum wage law is nothing but a small manifestation of slavery - you are forcing people to pay above a fair market rate for labor.
That is evil!
Please stop comparing minumum wage to slavery. Slaves did NOT get paid at all. And what's worse is you're not even comparing the laborer to slaves, you're saying it's the rich being enslaved. My goodness! This place is insane sometimes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
