Author Topic: Fairness In The Entertainment Business And Other Lib Strongholds (Read 1699 times)

trapeze · « **on:** January 25, 2012, 09:28:16 PM »

In the SOTU speech Captain Blowhard scolded the nation for the umpteenth time about how important it was for everyone to work together and for those who were rewarded richly to "pay their fair share" or some other such nonsense. This is quasi-communist talk and theory at best. I thought that maybe Congress should put out a bill that would use the president's theme to reform the grossly unfair system of income distribution in Hollywood*.

It would go something like this...

- All participants in the production of a movie/film/television program during actual production can only make the same wage as anyone else. Call it a "living wage" that allows for the participants to eat, pay for reasonable housing costs and afford some form of public transportation. The least skilled and talented person will make the exact same production wage as the most skilled and talented person. That's only fair, after all.

- A movie/film/television program must actually make money at the box office (or through successful ad revenue on television) before anyone involved in the production can reap any further reward. If the movie/film/television program does poorly then the rewards are small or nonexistent. If the movie/film/television program does well then the reward is evenly distributed between all participants. That's only fair, after all.

- All rewards from successful movie/film/television programs will be further broken up so that half of the revenue goes to the participants in money losing productions. That's only fair, after all.

One of Obongo's henchmen (Elizabeth Warren, I think) once pointed out that it wasn't fair for business owners to make so much money and pay relatively little in taxes because the little people paid relatively more in taxes that paid for roads, bridges, police, firemen, etc. These public services, after all, make the environment for wealth creation possible. This is the socialist's/communist's justification for a progressive income tax system that punishes wealth creation and subsidizes sloth. The above legislation merely cuts to the chase and equalizes everything from the outset.

I propose that this legislation start with the movie/film/television industry and then move on to the music industry. The professional sports industry could be next.

That's only fair, after all.

*And to be fair this would have to apply to all Broadway style productions, too. It isn't fair that some productions make millions while a dinner theater performance in Des Moines makes chump change.

charlesoakwood · « **Reply #1 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:34:58 PM »

Fairness in the entertainment business would be producing a
movie worth watching.

trapeze · « **Reply #2 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:37:51 PM »

Occupy Hollywood where it just isn't fair that the 1% makes so much more than the 99%. Even it all out. Get those multi-million dollar salaries inline with the valet parking attendents wages.

Libertas · « **Reply #3 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:39:25 PM »

Yeah, that's when reality hits the face.

This plan goes after Oprah right out the gate too, right? Not fair she should have all that income, eh?!

/

This whole fairness meme is socialist code for theft from the productive to give to the unproductive. They somehow think the unproductive could be made more productive by taking from the one and giving to the other. The stupid lying class-warfare jackasses know full well this only rewards the lazy and punishes the achiever, but there are more of the former to indenture to the state than the latter, the latter also being naturally and obviously disinclined to be indentured. They want to start a war between people. I am inclined to enjoin that battle!

trapeze · « **Reply #4 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:41:21 PM »

It's that and much more.

Once you start down the "fairness" path there is simply no end to it.

It just isn't fair that someone has an "unfair" share of talent. Or skills. Or motivation. Or whatever.

Government has to level that playing field.

It isn't fair that Tom Cruise has a distinctive and attractive countenance that makes him more likely to be picked to star in a movie. Perhaps casting should be done by a lottery where everyone who wants to be an actor has an equal chance at getting the lead.

This whole business of voting for contestants on American Idol is unfair, too. Everyone who calls in or texts should have to just pick a random number or letter that conceals the identity of the contestant so that everyone has a fair shot at winning.

Libertas · « **Reply #5 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:46:27 PM »

Government can satisfy all envy? Yeah, dumbest damn thing I ever heard!

Like I said, they know this too, they just don't care, they want slaves to keep them in power, period. They do not care at some point the mob gets them in the end, they figure that day can be kept at bay forever.

Therein is their true foolishness underlying their evil insatiable lust for power.

Pandora · « **Reply #6 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:48:51 PM »

Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron".

trapeze · « **Reply #7 on:** January 25, 2012, 09:50:42 PM »

Quote from: Libertas on January 25, 2012, 09:46:27 PM

Government can satisfy all envy? Yeah, dumbest damn thing I ever heard!

Like I said, they know this too, they just don't care, they want slaves to keep them in power, period. They do not care at some point the mob gets them in the end, they figure that day can be kept at bay forever.

Therein is their true foolishness underlying their evil insatiable lust for power.

You are caught up in outdated thinking. You need to be more open and flexible...

OccupyWallStreet Logic

trapeze · « **Reply #8 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:28:17 PM »

This guy from The American Thinker does a much better job than I did in going after this "fairness" crap...

Quote

Thank you Mr. President, for bringing up the issue of fairness. I'm sure that's important to many people. One curious thing, though, with regard to the application of "fairness" it seems that all the recommendations you have, are decided by the government. Who decides what is fair?

Here's some suggestions:

The average Federal employee can be paid no more than the average American employee, currently $42K a yr. Wouldn't that be fair? And the highest amount paid to any retired Federal employee should be no more than the highest Social Security monthly amount. Wouldn't that be fair?

In the past few years, average Americans have lost ten percent of their income. All Federal employees shall receive ten percent pay cuts, and only receive increases when the average American earns more. Isn't that fair? After all, how can the government hope to get more money from taxpayers who are earning less?

Read the rest of his piece at the link...

LINK

Libertas · « **Reply #9 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:39:06 PM »

Bloody peasant!

I am flexible as to mode of removing tyrants from power and open to all ideas as to what to do with them once removed.

Bargo lists a lot of good examples of illustrating the point, and I like this term "moral extortion", as if these immoral proglodyte stooges infesting this Regime and the organs of the federal bureaucracy are acceptable candidates to determine who is and who is not being treated fairly in a nation founded upon individual rights and liberties!!! Fox/hen-house, hello?!?!?! But this illustrates the fundamental problem with Obama and the rest of the democrat party which is 100% taken over by the lunatic progressive fringe - they view our constitution as flawed! So many individual rights is too restrictive for their perverted definition of "good government"! Our rights are given to us by our Founders which flow naturally from Almighty God! They protect us from government, government has ZERO rights to enforce its will on us under any guise of "fairness" or "goodness" no matter who the hell is defining it!

Don't tread on me!

Liberty or death!

These things used to mean something fundamentally important to Americans and I damn sure intend to stick to them no matter what!

trapeze · « **Reply #10 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:42:42 PM »

Gingrich in a radio interview today opined that Obongo's idea of fairness is "all of us on foodstamps."

Newt Gingrich: Obama's View of Fairness is "All of us on Food Stamps"

If only Romney could say sh*t like this he would have the nomination wrapped up by now.

Libertas · « **Reply #11 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:47:51 PM »

Yup! Screw dependency! How hard a choice is it to clearly state that?!

Newt does it, Mitt can't.

trapeze · « **Reply #12 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:48:47 PM »

Quote from: Libertas on January 25, 2012, 10:47:51 PM

Yup! Screw dependency! How hard a choice is it to clearly state that?!

Newt does it, Mitt can't.

But there's the rub. Mitt can but Mitt won't. Only Mitt knows why.

Libertas · « **Reply #13 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:52:37 PM »

Quote from: trapeze on January 25, 2012, 10:48:47 PM

Quote from: Libertas on January 25, 2012, 10:47:51 PM
Yup! Screw dependency! How hard a choice is it to clearly state that?!

Newt does it, Mitt can't.

But there's the rub. Mitt can but Mitt won't. Only Mitt knows why.

Only three possibilities as I see it. 1) He doesn't entirely believe it 2) It opens him up to attacks by others who will use his own words and deeds against him showing everyone he doesn't entirely believe it & 3) both are correct.

Either way, it indicates Mitt has a fatal flaw, a blindside and/or lack of core principles.

Not what I want in a candidate for the Big Chair!

IronDioPriest · « **Reply #14 on:** January 25, 2012, 10:55:38 PM »

Romney either does not believe that Obama intends to harm the economy in service of Leftism and the Democrats, or Romney does not believe it is politically tenable to say it outright.

Either way, it's why he's not resonating when juxtaposed against Gingrich's willingness to call Obama outright for socialist policies and ignoble intentions.

charlesoakwood · « **Reply #15 on:** January 25, 2012, 11:41:12 PM »

Whatever it is it's virulent.

Rubio's out sticking up for Romney.
Romney supported him early on and it's turnabout's.
Romney's had Rubio's people working for him in FL
for a while. And Romney's in withe Crist. It's all
about people. I can see Cornyn & Co salivating.

It's sick really sick, them playing this game, running
this scam or even more perverse actually believing it.

trapeze · « **Reply #16 on:** January 25, 2012, 11:47:52 PM »

Some of Ann Coulter's stuff on Romney is pretty sick. Again, don't get me wrong...I'm not a cheerleader for Gingrich or anyone else but Coulter is an over-the-top, enthusiastic, "I want to have his babies" type of supporter. Example of this type of fawning adoration.

Now that's sick and perverse.

charlesoakwood · « **Reply #17 on:** January 26, 2012, 12:18:06 AM »

We're heading straight to "Hocus Pocus".

Pandora · « **Reply #18 on:** January 26, 2012, 12:20:37 AM »

Quote from: Charles Oakwood on January 26, 2012, 12:18:06 AM

We're heading straight to "Hocus Pocus".

O? Ok, fine. I CAN be the biggest, baddest witch on the block.

I have to wonder what color is the sky in the world of some o' these folks.

charlesoakwood · « **Reply #19 on:** January 26, 2012, 12:59:23 AM »

I was struck by your Vonnegut association and coincidentally
with all the bizarrity going on this past year it has occurred
more than once that we're in the onset of his "Hocus Pocus".

Author Topic: Fairness In The Entertainment Business And Other Lib Strongholds (Read 1699 times)

charlesoakwood

charlesoakwood

charlesoakwood

charlesoakwood