base talk Is it okay to earn a billion dollars from being a musician and doing a world tour?

[wastedpotential]

Just now, Bloo said:

Are we seriously going to pretend the tax codes work for billionaires because it's a pop star we, generally, like?  

 

It's a known fact that billionaires often pay less in taxes than working class people.

There's a difference in the kind of taxes that a Mark Zuckerberg pays when all of his wealth is stored in Meta's value or Elon's wealth in his various companies; and Taylor's, where it is still "salaried" to her by Messina Touring and Spotify and UMG. My math might be off, but she's not storing the majority of her wealth in 13 Management's value (we can see how much they pay in taxes in Tennessee and it's not huge), so she's getting hit with the 37% federal income tax on at least some chunk of her income. It's hard to store wealth offshore when every magazine on the planet is covering how your tour made a billion dollars and Spotify publicly reported that it paid you 100 million 

[Arrows]

Is it okay to earn 600 mio from touring? 300 mio? 100 mio? 10 mio?

 

Where would you draw the line?

 

What if someone still made a billion after paying 90% in taxes, would that still be unethical?

 

I’m all for way higher taxation of the richest individuals and companies in the US, but the OP misunderstands something crucial about incentive and what keeps the economy afloat. “No billionaires by any means” would crash the entire economy, and I’m dead serious.

 

If our beloved Tay could never earn a dime more than a billion, there’d be no more Eras tour dates, no future album campaigns, no boost of local economies. The thousands who worked on the tour would be jobless.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Arrows

[AMIT]

Just now, Arrows said:

“No billionaires by any means” would crash the entire economy, and I’m dead serious.

 

If our beloved Tay could never earn a dime more than a billion, there’d be no more Eras tour dates, no future album campaigns, no boost of local economies.

 

how would the world SURVIVE without no more Taylor Swift tours or album campaigns!! 

[Kimi]

1 minute ago, Arrows said:

What if someone still made a billion after paying 90% in taxes, would that still be unethical?

Yes girl, that even being possible would prove total decay of that country’s economic system. 

[Rep2000]

2 minutes ago, ugo said:

she actually pays her taxes and workers...

Exactly. It's not like Taylor setting up her HQ in Nowhere, Ireland or tax havens to evade taxes.
Or she has lobbyists set up in DC whispering to Congressmen to cut down her own tax codes.

[Bussea]

is it okay?  what are they supposed to do. reject the money?  if she exploited and underpaid workers than yeah, she doesn’t deserve all that money, sure, but Taylor doesn’t do that, gives back to her fans, donate, and etc.

 

I personally don’t care who’s a billionaire and who’s not at the end of the day, because i don’t pocket check people and i’m never seeing the money even if I did

Edited December 13, 2023 by Cult Leader 𐕣𐕣

[vale9001]

If a concert makes 20M the artist makes 5M and other people make 15M. 

The artist makes more than the others cause the reason the other 15M exist It's him, if he doesn't make more Money than others he won't travel to 657 countries to make 680 concerts just because....and the more concerts he makes more different people will take Money from that 15M for every concert.

 

Mozart worked for commision. It wasn't just "i  woke and i'm going to write music Just cause i have". Inspiration was there but 70% of his Total work was just commissioned and made for Money. 

 

Now stop the hypocrisy and go back to talk about what Is the Better visual album Beyoncé made only because She worked so much She has the Money to create It. 

 

 

Pop culture stans and they speak with 1860 slogans 

Edited December 13, 2023 by vale9001

[Arrows]

6 minutes ago, AMIT said:

 

how would the world SURVIVE without no more Taylor Swift tours or album campaigns!! 

The thousands who worked on the tour probably wouldn’t, as they’d lose their jobs. 
 

Society would literally collapse if there was a cap on how much someone could be worth.

 

Tax the **** out of her though? Yes please.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Arrows

[bad guy]

It's not like she has 1B of attainable cash sitting in a bank account. Much of the profits of the tour go to the label, dancers, set designers, audio technicians, assistants, security, the venue, the city, etc. And with her wealth in general, most of it is in assets (houses, private plane, etc.).

 

I don't think having a billion dollars is ethical but that's more of an issue with the system rather than the individual. Unless you actively seek harm like Bezos, Gates, Epstein, Musk, I don't find musicians' billionaire status that uncomfortable. I can't imagine having that much access and not doing more with it to help others, but that's just me. 

[Gelato]

Scientists who have invented life saving drugs aren't billionaires so I say no

[AMIT]

4 minutes ago, Arrows said:

The thousands who worked on the tour probably wouldn’t, as they’d lose their jobs. 
 

Society would literally collapse if there was a cap on how much someone could be worth.

 

Tax the **** out of her though? Yes please.

What exactly are you basing this on? 

 

I am actually against taxing the rich, or at least I don't really see the point. I mean, are we expecting the government to distribute that money fairly to the benefit of its subjects, when that never happens unless they are extremely pressured to do so (and even then they get the final say on where to spend the money on anyway)? 

 

Again, the discussion should be centered on the system that allows billionaires to exist, by not doing so we are missing the forest for the trees. 

[Pheromosa]

I feel like this conversation is never productive 

[RihsUmbrella]

It doesn’t matter who you are or what your field is, there isn’t an ethical way of becoming a billionaire. Or at least maintaining that status. 
 
So no it is not okay

 

[poki]

Billionaires are destroying the United States. Period. No ifs, no butts. 

 

Taxing The Rich: The Evolution Of America’s Marginal Income Tax Rate [Infographic] (forbes.com)

[poki]

Please look into the 90% tax rule the US had on the rich pre-Reagan y'all. 

 

Edit: Sry I don't mean to come across as rude, but the rich are trying to bury the history of the 90% tax and it's sadly working. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by Hey Dude

[Goaty]

31 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Are we seriously going to pretend the tax codes work for billionaires because it's a pop star we, generally, like?  

 

It's a known fact that billionaires often pay less in taxes than working class people.

Yes but aren’t most billionaires deemed as such due to stock / company valuations? 
 

While I agree that the existence of billionaires is a moral dilemma regardless of how “ethical” the capital is generated, there’s a difference between Taylor’s assumed revenue streams and Zuckerberg having billions in unrealized capital gains. 

[Bussea]

And one thing I always noticed about Taylor critiques is the whole, “I work hard too!!! where’s my billion!!!!”, like boo you’re probably flipping burgers or folding sweaters (which isn’t a bad thing, but let’s be serious) and probably call out everyday from that too. Artists like Taylor, are constantly writing, recording, rehearsing, flying to different countries, performing hours on end every night and work hard for they crafts, if a billion is what they get for 17 years of hard work, a billion is what they deserve. Most of the money is going towards her crew, the music, visuals and other expenses so I genuinely don’t see the issue. If it was a Jeff Bezos situation? sure.

 

Do I believe billionaires should exist? Eh. If you’re smart with your money

Do I believe they should be taxed? Absolutely 

 

There’s another conversation that needs to be had here, but it’ll probably pop up at a later date. Tax her and other billionaires, make housing more affordable and give us higher wages  It makes no sense that we’re being taxed when we’re struggling and billionaires aren’t.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by Cult Leader 𐕣𐕣

[Karla Cabello]

no,  billionaires should not exist

Edited December 13, 2023 by Karla Cabello

[Arrows]

6 minutes ago, AMIT said:

What exactly are you basing this on? 

On the outcome in any country where such ideas have been experimented with. 
 

6 minutes ago, AMIT said:

Again, the discussion should be centered on the system that allows billionaires to exist, by not doing so we are missing the forest for the trees. 

I completely agree. The US needs to firstly get rid of the 2-party “winner of each state takes it all” system. Allow many parties to be elected into congress and make them join up to form a majority government.

 

Still though - a cap on how much someone can be worth is not useful.

[Goaty]

No doubt Taylor’s relative tax burden is still less than the average worker, but it’s nothing like Bezos taking out loans against his stock portfolio and thus paying zero tax on any of it. 
 

basically my point is that when people eat the rich, while Taylor will be included in that group, she won’t be first in line. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by Goaty

[Renzo_]

That’s how a efficient market works. If you provide high-quality goods at the best price, you’ll earn a lot of money.

[thirdward]

I’m sure that money is not only from touring 

she seems like the kind that would have investments

[Lemon]

18 minutes ago, Gelato said:

Scientists who have invented life saving drugs aren't billionaires so I say no

Life saving drugs as in medicine that is used for genetic diseases, for example? Unfortunately, the medication in question is extremely expensive and equating tour ticket to it is not good analogy, since majority of the people don’t have access to the kind of money needed for that medicine type. But that’s another conversation. 

[wastedpotential]

6 minutes ago, Goaty said:

No doubt Taylor’s relative tax burden is still less than the average worker, but it’s nothing like Bezos taking out loans against his stock portfolio and thus paying zero tax on any of it. 
 

basically my point is that when people eat the rich, Taylor should not be first in line. 

And even then, at least half of Taylor's billion dollars comes from her catalogue's estimated value, and that value is pretty much entirely derived from her own songwriting and the production and mastering of like 20 people. It's all just potential earnings in the hypothetical eventuality that she might sell it, which is obviously never going to happen, so it's hardly even worth discussing in a net worth conversation. The other people involved in the musical creation process for pop stars often aren't paid fairly, but knowing Taylor's history with bonuses, I can't imagine that she's nickel and dime-ing the guy who does the vocal layering 

 

She should be taxed at a much higher rate, certainly, the top tax bracket should be increased back at least above 50% and preferably much further, but it's not as if her catalogue value would be hit by that anyway. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by wastedpotential

[Alexz]

1 hour ago, BrokenMachine said:

How it 'creates' money for many other people if the entertainer keeps that $1B ?

They don't.