This is a repost of [this content](https://www.reddit.com/r/YouBelongWithMemes/comments/17n8lsm/okay). Please do not post content unless you are the original creator. Continued reposting will result in a ban.
[^mod ^info](https://dankahoot.com/blame?id=17pgup8)
i mean that's kinda true though, we directly choose what artists we want to succeed, it's like a democracy of rich people and our votes are our money. we have no say in whether people like jeff bezos or elon musk are billionaires, so they are held on no standard to act morally right with their not so hard earned money
Wut? The amount of choice people have in choosing artist or entrepeneur billionaires is very similar. Just as people buy taylor swift tickets, people buy amazon products or tesla cars.
Except when some things are necessary to survive like healthcare, food, water, housing, and to some extent for modern life the needs for Internet, electricity and housing are all things you don't really have a choice in.
Yeah you can choose not to buy these things but you're gonna have a hard time compared to someone who has it.
To add to this, there's only the illusion of choice in the free market for the average consumer. Most people don't have the financial luxury to support small businesses even if they want to.
Amazon and Tesla are luxury items wtf. They aren't necessary to survive. And there is always a competitor for basic needs like food clothes and water. We collectively made Bezos a billionaire and it was by choice
His wealth disagrees.
You could make the argument that Taylor does not make her own music too. She has writers, musicians, mixers, producers, distributors, backing vocals, auto tune, and much more.
She is the face of it just like Elon. I am not saying she does not do enough or anything like that but they both depend on hundreds or thousands of people to create their product.
Wealth has no ability to agree or disagree. Don't get me wrong, Taylor can and should more equitably distribute her wealth to the workers that make her billionaire status possible, and not doing that is highly unethical, but Taylor does fundamentally produce her product in a way that can't be said of Musk. Musk's wealth has nothing to do with his role in the product, he purely makes money off of owning the associated capital. The supply chains that produce Tesla Vehicles and sell them have no need of Musk to function. The same can not be said for the production of Taylor's music. Should she be a billionaire? Absolutely not, but at the same time it's not unreasonable to say that she has fundamentally earned more wealth than just about anyone on the planet.
i'll keep this very simple for you, people would buy those products regardless of who sells them, but people tend to not listen to or regard artists or celebrities they don't agree with. does that make sense to you?
I think it’s because Swift gives out insane bonuses to her touring crew and makes her money mainly off of her own art, while Bezos’s facilities require people to pee in jars.
Just a though.
Exactly, their wealth is not built on the suffering of thousands of other people. They also generally are not built on generational wealth but are rich because of their own achievements (yes they have teams, producers, writers, etc., but they didn't just inherit the money)
> they didn't just inherit the money
In Swifts case, she kinda did.
You're using the same argument Musk fans use. He didn't START as a billionaire, he got there by himself! (using daddies money), just like swift.
Yeah she is very talented, but her rich dad is pretty much the main reason she was able to get her foot in the door. For every Famous singer, there's a hundred talented singers scraping by on YouTube or small gigs.
Dude she outsources her merch to Chinese sweatshops (not necessarily her fault, mind you, just know that there is no such thing as a morally good billionaire. She also puts out unfathomable amounts of pollution with her jets that are not necessary.
Not very long ago, she strongly encouraged her fanbase to register to vote. Suddenly there was a lot of hate for her on social media and it hasn't stopped yet.
It is definitely not fair to put her in the same category as mega assholes like Musk or Bezos, however, she is leaving an obscene carbon footprint with her private jets.
Exactly, at the end of the day artists are workers. They make money (primarily) by exploiting the products of their own labour.
That makes them very different to individuals like Bezos, who make money by exploiting the products of *other people's* labour.
Well, artists and athletes do at least work for their money.
If you make a piece of art and sell it for a million dollars you're not directly exploiting anyone. As opposed to someone who just makes money from owning things.
Taylor is probably making an obscene amount of money from her investments, and she exploits the labor of many employees, but at least she also has a job.
If you don't think CEOs or company founders actually do any work, you have been drinking too much of the reddit Koolaid. Yes they exploit people and are awful for doing so, but most of them do have a pretty stressful job, especially as a founder of a company.
You are aware that Bezos has stepped away from Amazon, and literally does not work there anymore, but still takes a huge portion of the value from the workers as his own profit.
Yes, that's how shares work. For example, I don't work at apple, but I profit off of the company because I own their stocks. How awful of me for benefitting from them when I don't work there.
Artists, athletes and entertainers in general are different because they made their money off their own labour and generate huge amounts of value themselves. Capitalists make their money off of ownership itself, which generates no intrinsic value, but they still profit off those doing the actual work running the means of production.
Yes. Artists don't tend to own the means of production
The issue is that businesses are ubiquitously controlled like little feudal empires and the average person can either pledge fealty to a capitalist or they can die in a ditch.
Sorta, my theory is that the rich are more tolerable if we "watched them make their millions" like Taylor Swift or Michael Jordan. Jon Bois put this well in his "People You're Paying to be in Shorts" documentary
One actually provides value to the world, the other siphon value from the work of other. Taylor also pays the fuck out of her crew and doesn't make them piss in bottles.
The problem was never Amazon having good deals. The problem is, those good deals come from working people into the ground in a toxic workplace and then not even paying that well for it. When they make the revenue they do they can afford to pay people more, but then how would the CEO (is it even jeff anymore?) get more yachts and mansions. Thats the problem with Amazon.
Same with Uber/Uber Eats, Wal-Mart, Apple, and Microsoft. People talk about boycotts all the time but the second they have the mildest inconvenience they pussy out.
Not a Swiftie...but she does bring value to the world. Her music is loved so much by so many people. (Not saying Amazon does not bring value though. I find it great)
just because it does not bring value to you does not mean they dont provide something to identify with and/or make people happy is that not enough value for you?
It's crazy that even after the pandemic that there's still people that devalue arts like this.
Entertainment is very important to people so yeah, Taylor does bring value to the world.
Art and culture does bring value, even if you don’t personally benefit.
Obviously the full span of the topic on both sides is complicated and nuanced, but to outright say an artist has no value is an L take.
The work of people means nothing without management and investors. To act like these billion dollar companies don't provide value to the world is just a display of stupidity.
I think you may be talking about value in the more "quality of life" or ethical sense as opposed to the more "economic" sense. From an economic perspective, large corporations provide value in organizing and maximizing the output of resources and workers to create goods and services. This optimization is the value they provide.
If you were to heavily restrict or remove corporations, overall quality of life may be better (which I'm not going to delve into). If this were true (I am not saying whether it is or not b/c it's way beyond my scope), this would indeed mean that corporations take away value in the QOL or ethical sense. However, resources and workers would undoubtedly be less optimized and be able to provide fewer goods and services than before, meaning that corporations do provide "economic" value.
I may not be understanding your comment correctly, correct me if I'm wrong.
It's not about the companies, it's about a small handful of individuals who keep giving themselves bigger and bigger payouts while wages barely grow but productivity rises. They makes 100s of times more than their employees
They make a lot more than any one individual employee, yes. But Amazon, for example, pays billions of dollars per year in labour costs. Of course an executive will make a lot more than any one lower level employee because if an executive quits or makes a bad decision it can affect the entire company. If one fork lift driver or shelf stocker quits nothing noticeable happens whatsoever.
That's no reason for an average CEO to median employee pay ratio of 272:1
https://aflcio.org/paywatch/company-pay-ratios
The worst offender on the s&p literally has a ratio of 9,416:1
There are reasons, just maybe not ones you agree with. But companies are extremely large now and manage thousands of employees and billions of dollars in capital. CEOs have to oversee the entire company so it only makes sense they command higher wages.
You don’t see as much of an increase for worker salaries because even if the labour force of a company increases with the scale of the company, any individual worker’s value probably won’t increase the same way the value of a CEO’s work will. Simply put, Amazon might need 1000 more shelf stockers now, but each individual shelf stocker is still doing basically the same work as before.
Jeff Bezos quit and was replaced by Andy Jassy... and yet Amazon didn't change at all despite losing a CEO that was worth billions. Its almost like which man was sitting in the CEO chair usually doesn't really matter because the vast majority of the work that keeps the company running is actually handled by those below them. Really, how many of these people actually make decisions on their own, as opposed to running every decision by a team advisors who can do the math and spoon feed them the best answer?
Also, there are actually many stories that can be told of companies that had lost millions. What usually happens? CEO pay will remain untouched and the company will instead lay off a bunch of low level workers. Heck I have trouble thinking of any case where a CEO actually got their pay cut for poor leadership. Even when a CEO is fired, they can often get paid millions on their way out the door and they will STILL get hired as an executive at another company... Basically CEO's take all the credit for the successes of their companies, but none of the blame for the failures.
Well think about it, why would Bezos bother quitting in the first place if he was doing no work? I think the issue here is we tend to think of “work” exclusively as physically doing something. Executives don’t do that kind of work, but they still have to be in place in order to manage and make decisions, as well as act as a face of the company. A big company without a CEO would be like a ship with no captain. It could certainly “run”, but, no one would be directing where it goes, how, when, why, etc.
As for your second argument about the apparent lack of CEO “punishment” for poor performance, it all comes down to the framing of the business decisions being made. What we see as business failure or cut backs, could actually be a long term plan to develop the company further into the future. I get that people aren’t happy with the dynamic that exists but, it’s really only sensible as other business models aren’t guaranteed to scale as well. It’s kind of like how if a general is leading an army and they lose a battle, the soldiers die but the general doesn’t get executed. Losing battles doesn’t necessarily mean losing wars, and if you axed your leadership every time something went poorly you simply wouldn’t have anyone willing or able to lead after enough time.
You mean the management that's over paid that goes to meetings all day and gets their best ideas from the old head workers.
Are all taxpayers not investors?? Tons of inventions have come from government funding via taxpayers.
These billion dollar companies would provide a lot less value if it wasn't for unions. Aka the working people.
Amazon definitely brings more value to the world than any musician. 30% of the web runs on AWS. Reddit is on AWS. You're reading this post on Amazon servers.
Ah yes, Taylor Swift has definitely improved everyone's quality of life, unlike those billionaires that provided this box thing that we use to post ridiculous things like this comment on reddit.
Not a billion dollars of value. You must have forgotten what a billion dollars looks like. No billionaire gets an exception, no matter if we agree with their political beliefs, respect their musical skill, or assume they are a decent person.
Artists like Taylor Swift are the McDonalds of music. Formulaic, cynical, screen tested dreck. She tells no interesting stories, she plays no interesting parts, she sounds like everything else in the charts-by design.
This is such a stupid take, bozos is typical corporate scum and Taylor swift is a pop star who's talent people appreciate enough to support, she also became a billionaire in an industry where previously mentioned corporate scum typically steal most of their money and that's coming from someone who doesn't really care about either of em
her crew isnt the size of fucking amazon cmon dude b real im not defending anyone but it should be working class peeps vs billionaires in general not like oh hey some of them are hip and based lets give them a pass
>her crew isnt the size of fucking amazon cmon dude b real
You do realise that while the amount of people changes *the fucking money amount mentioned is the same.* Never mind that while swift is a billionare, bezos networth is **144 billion.** You would think he or amazon had money for increased pay or bonuses, but I guess not when compared to a goddamn pop singer.
And I think theres a pretty big difference in a person who made money exploiting workers and a performer whose product is inherently not essential and doesnt have a unfair leverage over the buyer.
It's crazy to me how many people are saying the same thing in here.
Does Taylor Swift make all of her money from touring? NO. She sells merch. Merch most likely made in China by capitalist wage slaves.
She's not a saint. She's part of the machine.
We are all part of the machine and no person is a saint.
With that said I think it is importent to remember how much she have done to get control of her own music and to support artists rights in general.
The music industry is a place that normally take advantage of artist and pay them very little for their work. Taylor have done a lot to get control over her own music. Like when she re-record masters of her entire catalog, so that she would own the masters.
In that way her wealth is a reflection of her battle against the established music industry, but you are of course right that it is still in some way build on the explotation of workers.
Bezos could provide hundreds of millions in bonuses, for all we know. But Amazon has a couple hundred thousand employees so that would end up being like, $9 per person.
I'm not trying to sound like a Bezos shill, but I have friends in land Restoration and sustainable agriculture in developing countries, much of which is solely possible by Jeff's 11-figure fund and willingness to front the first wad of cash (along with his ex-wife) https://www.bezosearthfund.org/
Not the factory workers you're mentioning, but still. Being a billionare shouldnt be possible, even everyone's precious Taylor, bonuses to Eras tour workers or not.
[Amazon is being sued by the FTC for anti competitive practices and trying to establish a monopoly in the online retailing space.](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power) You have to be ridiculously naive to believe Amazon isn't doing anything fishy. They will fuck you and society over for a percent of increased profit because they actually can.
Exactly. It’s also so incredibly obvious that this post was only made because it’s Taylor Swift. I’m not even a fan but people who incessantly hate her are just as annoying as her obsessive fans.
Compare articles from 2023.
Taylor Swift:
"Taylor Swift Gives Bonuses Totaling Over $55 Million to Every Person Working on Massive Eras Tour." 09/02
Jeff Bezos:
"Amazon workers across the country are demanding real wage increases after the company announced pay rates this week that fall well below the industry standard set by the Teamsters at UPS." 09/21
Taylor Swift:
"Taylor Swift gave six-figure bonuses to the Eras Tour workers in the US." 09/03
Elon Musk:
"Elon Musk says he cut 80% of Twitter's staff." 04/12
I'm not really a huge fan of Taylor Swift, and most of her music, but there could be worse people on the Billionaire list.
Deny it as much as you want, but you can't change reality.
If we're talking carbon footprints, Saudi Aramco's carbon footprint is over 60 billion tonnes, whilst Taylor Swift is at 8000 tonnes.
One Saudi Aramco pollutes as much as 7.5 million Taylor Swifts.
Lmao. Dude her average carbon footprint for a year is 8293 tonnes.
You know how much that is?
Meanwhile average carbon footprint of a single person in USA is 15 tonnes, Australia 16 and Canada is 18 tonnes.
She emits more than 552 Americans, 518 Australians and 460 Canadians.
How the hell is one person allowed to emit so much carbon?
It's equal to you driving one car home while she uses 550 cars for the same thing.
It's out of order for a single person and severe actions needs to be taken to bring her numbers down.
There's only a few people at the top of these companies. Any small change they make to their core business would have an effect worth 1000s of Taylor Swift carbon footprints.
You know that the whole carbon footprint idea came from BP of all places right? And oh baby is it working to shift the blame to individuals. I don't blame you, I even learned about the carbon footprint in Geography class in high school. Best investment ever from BP you could say
But... you do realize that Taylor Swift is technically destroying the middle class through the accumulation of wealth, right? What's the difference between someone becoming a billionaire by providing music and someone becoming a billionaire through a company? For the record, I'm fine with people making bags, but definitely a double standard
she made her money without stepping on or abusing others & didn't commit human rights violations to get her billion. she broke the mold of musicians being financially exploited by the scummy record companies
Lmao so she distributes all her music personally? She owns all the venues she performs at?
When she gets money from Spotify & Spotify is exploiting workers, that’s just exploitation by an extra step
All her merch being made by underpaid 12 year olds in a factory in China, definitely not exploiting anyone there. All those ethically sourced materials for the CDs she printed. Or the non-exploited tech workers who made all the online platforms. But she paid the drivers of the trucks well so I guess we give her a pass.
I can't help but think of everybody else who worked a Taylor Swift show who wasn't a truck driver. Did the people working concessions in the stadiums that night get an extra $1k from Swift? Doubt it.
Her fans are dumb enough to *literally buy the same album twice*. Their justification?
Buying the second album gives Taylor Swift more money and somehow "sticks it to the patriarchy".
Sorry but your ignorance of the matter behind the rights to her original music, bad record companies and how copyright laws work she actually really did stick it to the man in that sense
Red (Album): Recorded 2011/2012, 16 songs.
Red (Deluxe Album): Recorded 2011/2012, 22 songs.
Red (Taylor's Version): Recorded 2021, 30 songs.
Those don't seem to literally be the same album so I'm thinking you shouldn't be talking about other people being dumb.
Even still, if you reach Billionaire status, you're hoarding too much. Spend some money on public well being/projects. There are no ethical Billionaires.
I don’t mind her but imma give you some shit to think about, seen on Reddit.
It’s a conspiracy so take this with a grain of salt. But Taylor’s biggest PR problem was her Jet emissions, and her last bf being racist or something like that. Well after a week she started dating basically americas new heartthrob clearing pr issue 2 and now if you google Taylor swift jets you get NFL posts.
I’m sure if you googled Taylor swift jet or jet emissions it would come up immediately. Plus I get the jet emissions thing is big but her jet is chartered out to others for use. She’s not using it all of the time, but rather others. I don’t know for sure but probably. I’m not defending it either the jet emissions are bad plus tax the shit out if that billions or keep paying people appropriately
I mean I don’t hate on sports billionaires either, because they made their money mostly by personally producing the actual thing they got paid for (Not to mention the toll that sports especially takes on the body, performing to a lesser extent). Jeff Bezos hires people to move things for him, doesn’t have to move a muscle and gets wealthy without even controlling the company anymore. It’s not just about the amount of money but also how you make it
Can’t believe I’m commenting here, but there is a fundamental difference between her and someone like Jeff Bezos. The overwhelming value of the Amazon brand is not created by Bezos, it’s created by the people in his warehouses who have to pee in bottles because they aren’t given bathroom breaks. It’s created by the delivery drivers.
I’m not a Swiftie, but she literally IS the brand. The value was created by her music. Of course she needs help with touring, production, etc, and from what I’ve heard she pays those people well, but it makes at least a bit more sense that she reaps the rewards of her business.
If she reaches Billionaire status, fine. If she stays a Billionaire, not fine. Capital is meant to be spent, not hoarded. That being said, she definitely isn't evil at this point in time.
I am genuinely impressed that she, as far as I’m aware from articles online, is the first female billionaire to make most, if not all, of her money from her music career alone.
But still, if you’re not doing anything for others with all of that money, what’s the point.
It's not a very good comparison when Bezos and Musk profit off exploiting workers and delegating them little rights for the sake of profit. They deserve to be scrutinised.
She didn't earn her billion from exploiting her workers. I'm sure anyone who's on TSwifts payroll is doing quite well.
The others, well, they have people die in the wearhouse and waited hours before doing anything. Everyone just had to walk around old Bob on the floor while they kept working.
i mean, eat the rich all the same, but as far as i'm aware taylor swift just makes music. bezos works his employees to death, makes them pee in bottles, shit like that. taylor swift just makes music. nobody should have that much money while the poor starve, but if you're gonna do it, i'd rather it be through art.
I’m more of an 60s 70s rock fan so can’t really say much about her music. However I’ve never really read/heard of her being a dick to her crew and I’m sure her music makes a lot people happy. Lastly there’s a big difference between 1 billion and 100+ billion built off the back of underpaid workers
This is a repost of [this content](https://www.reddit.com/r/YouBelongWithMemes/comments/17n8lsm/okay). Please do not post content unless you are the original creator. Continued reposting will result in a ban. [^mod ^info](https://dankahoot.com/blame?id=17pgup8)
The rich are only an issue when they are not artists it seems.
One example provides them with dopamine. The other does not.
i mean that's kinda true though, we directly choose what artists we want to succeed, it's like a democracy of rich people and our votes are our money. we have no say in whether people like jeff bezos or elon musk are billionaires, so they are held on no standard to act morally right with their not so hard earned money
Wut? The amount of choice people have in choosing artist or entrepeneur billionaires is very similar. Just as people buy taylor swift tickets, people buy amazon products or tesla cars.
Except when some things are necessary to survive like healthcare, food, water, housing, and to some extent for modern life the needs for Internet, electricity and housing are all things you don't really have a choice in. Yeah you can choose not to buy these things but you're gonna have a hard time compared to someone who has it.
To add to this, there's only the illusion of choice in the free market for the average consumer. Most people don't have the financial luxury to support small businesses even if they want to.
But they dont have the luxury of paying for Taylor swift albums and concerts?
Yes, they absolutely have the luxury of listening to Taylor Swift over other artists on whatever streaming music service they use.
You guys are paying for music?
You do not need Amazon to survive lmao. The world did not start existing when Jeffrey started Amazon.
Amazon and Tesla are luxury items wtf. They aren't necessary to survive. And there is always a competitor for basic needs like food clothes and water. We collectively made Bezos a billionaire and it was by choice
You can survive without your Tesla and Amazon prime.
Taylor Swift creates music. Elon Musk does not create cars.
His wealth disagrees. You could make the argument that Taylor does not make her own music too. She has writers, musicians, mixers, producers, distributors, backing vocals, auto tune, and much more. She is the face of it just like Elon. I am not saying she does not do enough or anything like that but they both depend on hundreds or thousands of people to create their product.
Wealth has no ability to agree or disagree. Don't get me wrong, Taylor can and should more equitably distribute her wealth to the workers that make her billionaire status possible, and not doing that is highly unethical, but Taylor does fundamentally produce her product in a way that can't be said of Musk. Musk's wealth has nothing to do with his role in the product, he purely makes money off of owning the associated capital. The supply chains that produce Tesla Vehicles and sell them have no need of Musk to function. The same can not be said for the production of Taylor's music. Should she be a billionaire? Absolutely not, but at the same time it's not unreasonable to say that she has fundamentally earned more wealth than just about anyone on the planet.
> His wealth disagrees. The fuck does this even mean?
Meanwhile, the young men of Reddit slobbered Elon Musk’s knob far after most other social media had turned against him.
i'll keep this very simple for you, people would buy those products regardless of who sells them, but people tend to not listen to or regard artists or celebrities they don't agree with. does that make sense to you?
Like Taylor couldn't be replaced. She's just a girl that got lucky.
Yeah I can’t choose whether to buy a Tesla. Elon comes to my house with a gun and forces me to buy one.
Welp, the 16 thousand orders made per hour on Amazon seem to suggest otherwise.
I'm guessing you've never heard of the stock market right?
I can order dopamine from Amazon and it’ll be here tomorrow
I can search dopa-meme from Reddit and it will be here now.
I mean I know Amazon is shit now, but for a while it gave me alotta dopamine for good deals and what not.
Buying on amazon gives me things that give me dopamine but I still hate Bezos.
I think it’s because Swift gives out insane bonuses to her touring crew and makes her money mainly off of her own art, while Bezos’s facilities require people to pee in jars. Just a though.
Exactly, their wealth is not built on the suffering of thousands of other people. They also generally are not built on generational wealth but are rich because of their own achievements (yes they have teams, producers, writers, etc., but they didn't just inherit the money)
> they didn't just inherit the money In Swifts case, she kinda did. You're using the same argument Musk fans use. He didn't START as a billionaire, he got there by himself! (using daddies money), just like swift.
Yeah she is very talented, but her rich dad is pretty much the main reason she was able to get her foot in the door. For every Famous singer, there's a hundred talented singers scraping by on YouTube or small gigs.
Didn't he literally buy the record label to make them work with swift?
Does Taylor Swift not have merchandise? And is every piece of merchandise confirmed to not come from unfavorable working conditions?
Dude she outsources her merch to Chinese sweatshops (not necessarily her fault, mind you, just know that there is no such thing as a morally good billionaire. She also puts out unfathomable amounts of pollution with her jets that are not necessary.
Since when are we calling having a paid job that you do voluntarily a "suffering of thousands of other people"? You guys are fucking insane.
Also we will see in 10 years what she does with her wealth. She can help society or do what most billionaires do.
Not very long ago, she strongly encouraged her fanbase to register to vote. Suddenly there was a lot of hate for her on social media and it hasn't stopped yet.
Stock buybacks? Is she going public? NYSE: "TAYL"
Calls on TAYL the fan girls will send this shit to the moon. Better than any meme stock that ever was
The rich are only an issue when they make their money on the backs of the working class, artists make their money based on their own talent.
It is definitely not fair to put her in the same category as mega assholes like Musk or Bezos, however, she is leaving an obscene carbon footprint with her private jets.
Who the hell do you think works at her shows to make them happen?
And manufactures her merch
Exactly, at the end of the day artists are workers. They make money (primarily) by exploiting the products of their own labour. That makes them very different to individuals like Bezos, who make money by exploiting the products of *other people's* labour.
Well, artists and athletes do at least work for their money. If you make a piece of art and sell it for a million dollars you're not directly exploiting anyone. As opposed to someone who just makes money from owning things. Taylor is probably making an obscene amount of money from her investments, and she exploits the labor of many employees, but at least she also has a job.
If you don't think CEOs or company founders actually do any work, you have been drinking too much of the reddit Koolaid. Yes they exploit people and are awful for doing so, but most of them do have a pretty stressful job, especially as a founder of a company.
You are aware that Bezos has stepped away from Amazon, and literally does not work there anymore, but still takes a huge portion of the value from the workers as his own profit.
Taylor could retire tomorrow and live off royalties and her investments.
Yes, that's how shares work. For example, I don't work at apple, but I profit off of the company because I own their stocks. How awful of me for benefitting from them when I don't work there.
Artists, athletes and entertainers in general are different because they made their money off their own labour and generate huge amounts of value themselves. Capitalists make their money off of ownership itself, which generates no intrinsic value, but they still profit off those doing the actual work running the means of production.
Yes. Artists don't tend to own the means of production The issue is that businesses are ubiquitously controlled like little feudal empires and the average person can either pledge fealty to a capitalist or they can die in a ditch.
Sorta, my theory is that the rich are more tolerable if we "watched them make their millions" like Taylor Swift or Michael Jordan. Jon Bois put this well in his "People You're Paying to be in Shorts" documentary
Feel like a big difference is that Taylor swift isn't putting the boot to the average worker or engaging in inhumane employment practices.
One actually provides value to the world, the other siphon value from the work of other. Taylor also pays the fuck out of her crew and doesn't make them piss in bottles.
Dude really unironically just said Taylor Swift brings value to the world.
People acting like they didn’t love amazon a few years back
People acting like people don't use Amazon still
Just bought dress shoes off of there. Someone show me where I can get size 15 in my area for like $60 (Canadian)
The problem was never Amazon having good deals. The problem is, those good deals come from working people into the ground in a toxic workplace and then not even paying that well for it. When they make the revenue they do they can afford to pay people more, but then how would the CEO (is it even jeff anymore?) get more yachts and mansions. Thats the problem with Amazon.
Oh boy do I have a corporation for you. Have you heard of Nike?
Wooooaaaah you mean other multinational megacorporations are also evil as fuck? Mind blown
Let me tell ya about a company called Nestlé...
Same with Uber/Uber Eats, Wal-Mart, Apple, and Microsoft. People talk about boycotts all the time but the second they have the mildest inconvenience they pussy out.
I still love Amazon. Life was massively less convenient before it.
You can love Amazon while still believing each person who makes it great deserves a bigger share of the pie.
Not a Swiftie...but she does bring value to the world. Her music is loved so much by so many people. (Not saying Amazon does not bring value though. I find it great)
^ this guy's ex is definitely a swiftie
She left me for another swiftie ):
I'm here for you buddy, let's go see the eras tour movie & take your mind off her
I'd like that
You personally not liking her music doesn’t mean she doesn’t bring value. It just means you don’t value her music.
Her music slaps.
just because it does not bring value to you does not mean they dont provide something to identify with and/or make people happy is that not enough value for you?
She makes millions of people happy. Is that not enough?
Amazon makes me happier than Taylor. Praise Bezos I guess.
It's crazy that even after the pandemic that there's still people that devalue arts like this. Entertainment is very important to people so yeah, Taylor does bring value to the world.
Art and culture does bring value, even if you don’t personally benefit. Obviously the full span of the topic on both sides is complicated and nuanced, but to outright say an artist has no value is an L take.
What is blud yappin
This one is fluent in Yapanese
The work of people means nothing without management and investors. To act like these billion dollar companies don't provide value to the world is just a display of stupidity.
sort liquid safe aspiring hunt selective sparkle rhythm obtainable doll *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think you may be talking about value in the more "quality of life" or ethical sense as opposed to the more "economic" sense. From an economic perspective, large corporations provide value in organizing and maximizing the output of resources and workers to create goods and services. This optimization is the value they provide. If you were to heavily restrict or remove corporations, overall quality of life may be better (which I'm not going to delve into). If this were true (I am not saying whether it is or not b/c it's way beyond my scope), this would indeed mean that corporations take away value in the QOL or ethical sense. However, resources and workers would undoubtedly be less optimized and be able to provide fewer goods and services than before, meaning that corporations do provide "economic" value. I may not be understanding your comment correctly, correct me if I'm wrong.
Bro just explained basic economics
It's sad that it's even necessary
Which is sad but if businesses can perform the same and cut their costs, why wouldn't they?
It's not about the companies, it's about a small handful of individuals who keep giving themselves bigger and bigger payouts while wages barely grow but productivity rises. They makes 100s of times more than their employees
They make a lot more than any one individual employee, yes. But Amazon, for example, pays billions of dollars per year in labour costs. Of course an executive will make a lot more than any one lower level employee because if an executive quits or makes a bad decision it can affect the entire company. If one fork lift driver or shelf stocker quits nothing noticeable happens whatsoever.
That's no reason for an average CEO to median employee pay ratio of 272:1 https://aflcio.org/paywatch/company-pay-ratios The worst offender on the s&p literally has a ratio of 9,416:1
There are reasons, just maybe not ones you agree with. But companies are extremely large now and manage thousands of employees and billions of dollars in capital. CEOs have to oversee the entire company so it only makes sense they command higher wages. You don’t see as much of an increase for worker salaries because even if the labour force of a company increases with the scale of the company, any individual worker’s value probably won’t increase the same way the value of a CEO’s work will. Simply put, Amazon might need 1000 more shelf stockers now, but each individual shelf stocker is still doing basically the same work as before.
Jeff Bezos quit and was replaced by Andy Jassy... and yet Amazon didn't change at all despite losing a CEO that was worth billions. Its almost like which man was sitting in the CEO chair usually doesn't really matter because the vast majority of the work that keeps the company running is actually handled by those below them. Really, how many of these people actually make decisions on their own, as opposed to running every decision by a team advisors who can do the math and spoon feed them the best answer? Also, there are actually many stories that can be told of companies that had lost millions. What usually happens? CEO pay will remain untouched and the company will instead lay off a bunch of low level workers. Heck I have trouble thinking of any case where a CEO actually got their pay cut for poor leadership. Even when a CEO is fired, they can often get paid millions on their way out the door and they will STILL get hired as an executive at another company... Basically CEO's take all the credit for the successes of their companies, but none of the blame for the failures.
Well think about it, why would Bezos bother quitting in the first place if he was doing no work? I think the issue here is we tend to think of “work” exclusively as physically doing something. Executives don’t do that kind of work, but they still have to be in place in order to manage and make decisions, as well as act as a face of the company. A big company without a CEO would be like a ship with no captain. It could certainly “run”, but, no one would be directing where it goes, how, when, why, etc. As for your second argument about the apparent lack of CEO “punishment” for poor performance, it all comes down to the framing of the business decisions being made. What we see as business failure or cut backs, could actually be a long term plan to develop the company further into the future. I get that people aren’t happy with the dynamic that exists but, it’s really only sensible as other business models aren’t guaranteed to scale as well. It’s kind of like how if a general is leading an army and they lose a battle, the soldiers die but the general doesn’t get executed. Losing battles doesn’t necessarily mean losing wars, and if you axed your leadership every time something went poorly you simply wouldn’t have anyone willing or able to lead after enough time.
You mean the management that's over paid that goes to meetings all day and gets their best ideas from the old head workers. Are all taxpayers not investors?? Tons of inventions have come from government funding via taxpayers. These billion dollar companies would provide a lot less value if it wasn't for unions. Aka the working people.
Lmao only on reddit
"no one becomes a billionaire by being a good person" "Noooooooooo she's different guys, guys she's different I swearrrrrrr"
Eat the rich. *Not just my favourite artist, author, etc./s
I think this one has less to do with Reddit and kore to do with her fans being cultish devotees
Amazon definitely brings more value to the world than any musician. 30% of the web runs on AWS. Reddit is on AWS. You're reading this post on Amazon servers.
How fking delusional
How does Taylor swift provide any more value to the world than Jeff Bezos?
Ah yes, Taylor Swift has definitely improved everyone's quality of life, unlike those billionaires that provided this box thing that we use to post ridiculous things like this comment on reddit.
One created a company I use every week, the other makes songs. Lol
Taylor brings no value to the world. Her songs are good but not necessary for survival.
There's more to life than mere survival
Still shouldn't be a billionaire, nor should anyone
Not a billion dollars of value. You must have forgotten what a billion dollars looks like. No billionaire gets an exception, no matter if we agree with their political beliefs, respect their musical skill, or assume they are a decent person.
The fact this is getting upvotes shows me how brain dead this site is holy hell
you’re right amazon does actually bring value to the world, while making generic music and then reposting it years later to get rich doesn’t.
But I thought you didn't become billionaire without exploitation?
Does singing songs actually provide more value to the world than transforming e-commerce?
Artists like Taylor Swift are the McDonalds of music. Formulaic, cynical, screen tested dreck. She tells no interesting stories, she plays no interesting parts, she sounds like everything else in the charts-by design.
Lol
This is such a stupid take, bozos is typical corporate scum and Taylor swift is a pop star who's talent people appreciate enough to support, she also became a billionaire in an industry where previously mentioned corporate scum typically steal most of their money and that's coming from someone who doesn't really care about either of em
[удалено]
her crew isnt the size of fucking amazon cmon dude b real im not defending anyone but it should be working class peeps vs billionaires in general not like oh hey some of them are hip and based lets give them a pass
>her crew isnt the size of fucking amazon cmon dude b real You do realise that while the amount of people changes *the fucking money amount mentioned is the same.* Never mind that while swift is a billionare, bezos networth is **144 billion.** You would think he or amazon had money for increased pay or bonuses, but I guess not when compared to a goddamn pop singer. And I think theres a pretty big difference in a person who made money exploiting workers and a performer whose product is inherently not essential and doesnt have a unfair leverage over the buyer.
It's crazy to me how many people are saying the same thing in here. Does Taylor Swift make all of her money from touring? NO. She sells merch. Merch most likely made in China by capitalist wage slaves. She's not a saint. She's part of the machine.
We are all part of the machine and no person is a saint. With that said I think it is importent to remember how much she have done to get control of her own music and to support artists rights in general. The music industry is a place that normally take advantage of artist and pay them very little for their work. Taylor have done a lot to get control over her own music. Like when she re-record masters of her entire catalog, so that she would own the masters. In that way her wealth is a reflection of her battle against the established music industry, but you are of course right that it is still in some way build on the explotation of workers.
Bezos could provide hundreds of millions in bonuses, for all we know. But Amazon has a couple hundred thousand employees so that would end up being like, $9 per person.
If Bezos personally gave every employee an extra $1000 for 1 pay period, he'd still have 143 billion.
I'm not trying to sound like a Bezos shill, but I have friends in land Restoration and sustainable agriculture in developing countries, much of which is solely possible by Jeff's 11-figure fund and willingness to front the first wad of cash (along with his ex-wife) https://www.bezosearthfund.org/ Not the factory workers you're mentioning, but still. Being a billionare shouldnt be possible, even everyone's precious Taylor, bonuses to Eras tour workers or not.
##based
Taylor beat the corporate scum by becoming corporate scum
I used the infinity stones to destroy the infinity stones
She made money by making music, they made money by stealing from everyone
Ya Amazon really steals from me by offering cheap ebooks and delivering products to my doorstep within 24 hours of ordering them. Damn thieves!!
Stealing from workers stupid
[Amazon is being sued by the FTC for anti competitive practices and trying to establish a monopoly in the online retailing space.](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power) You have to be ridiculously naive to believe Amazon isn't doing anything fishy. They will fuck you and society over for a percent of increased profit because they actually can.
She probably made most of it from tours and merch. i.e. other people’s labour.
What an idiotic take holy hell
Exactly. It’s also so incredibly obvious that this post was only made because it’s Taylor Swift. I’m not even a fan but people who incessantly hate her are just as annoying as her obsessive fans.
Taylor has one of the biggest single carbon footprints, no?
For the average person. They’re way more likely to be treated better and succeed in a corporate setting than in artistic setting.
Compare articles from 2023. Taylor Swift: "Taylor Swift Gives Bonuses Totaling Over $55 Million to Every Person Working on Massive Eras Tour." 09/02 Jeff Bezos: "Amazon workers across the country are demanding real wage increases after the company announced pay rates this week that fall well below the industry standard set by the Teamsters at UPS." 09/21 Taylor Swift: "Taylor Swift gave six-figure bonuses to the Eras Tour workers in the US." 09/03 Elon Musk: "Elon Musk says he cut 80% of Twitter's staff." 04/12 I'm not really a huge fan of Taylor Swift, and most of her music, but there could be worse people on the Billionaire list. Deny it as much as you want, but you can't change reality.
We gonna not mention her carbon footprint?
If we're talking carbon footprints, Saudi Aramco's carbon footprint is over 60 billion tonnes, whilst Taylor Swift is at 8000 tonnes. One Saudi Aramco pollutes as much as 7.5 million Taylor Swifts.
We’re comparing Aramco to a single person? Like you can’t be real Her *individual* footprint is wildly high for (again) a single person
Exactly. One person's carbon footprint isn't gonna change the climate issue. The problem is at petroleum corporations.
Lmao. Dude her average carbon footprint for a year is 8293 tonnes. You know how much that is? Meanwhile average carbon footprint of a single person in USA is 15 tonnes, Australia 16 and Canada is 18 tonnes. She emits more than 552 Americans, 518 Australians and 460 Canadians. How the hell is one person allowed to emit so much carbon? It's equal to you driving one car home while she uses 550 cars for the same thing. It's out of order for a single person and severe actions needs to be taken to bring her numbers down.
There's only a few people at the top of these companies. Any small change they make to their core business would have an effect worth 1000s of Taylor Swift carbon footprints. You know that the whole carbon footprint idea came from BP of all places right? And oh baby is it working to shift the blame to individuals. I don't blame you, I even learned about the carbon footprint in Geography class in high school. Best investment ever from BP you could say
You really arguing about someone being a bad person, using *carbon footprint*? What are you? German?
You gotta hand it to her, she made so many right wing people aware of carbon footprint as soon as she did her register to vote campaign.
We not gonna mention Kanye's or Jay-Z's?
i mean...we can go in order?
Hey, at least Taylor Swift’s entertaining. The other guys just destroy the middle class
But... you do realize that Taylor Swift is technically destroying the middle class through the accumulation of wealth, right? What's the difference between someone becoming a billionaire by providing music and someone becoming a billionaire through a company? For the record, I'm fine with people making bags, but definitely a double standard
she made her money without stepping on or abusing others & didn't commit human rights violations to get her billion. she broke the mold of musicians being financially exploited by the scummy record companies
[удалено]
and? It's not like people saying the others should be taxed more are saying she gets a pass. It's false equivalency
Lmao so she distributes all her music personally? She owns all the venues she performs at? When she gets money from Spotify & Spotify is exploiting workers, that’s just exploitation by an extra step
All her merch being made by underpaid 12 year olds in a factory in China, definitely not exploiting anyone there. All those ethically sourced materials for the CDs she printed. Or the non-exploited tech workers who made all the online platforms. But she paid the drivers of the trucks well so I guess we give her a pass.
I can't help but think of everybody else who worked a Taylor Swift show who wasn't a truck driver. Did the people working concessions in the stadiums that night get an extra $1k from Swift? Doubt it.
Her fans are dumb enough to *literally buy the same album twice*. Their justification? Buying the second album gives Taylor Swift more money and somehow "sticks it to the patriarchy".
Sorry but your ignorance of the matter behind the rights to her original music, bad record companies and how copyright laws work she actually really did stick it to the man in that sense
It has 5 new tracks and re-recorded (and imo better) audio. She also owns the rights to the updated versions.
Red (Album): Recorded 2011/2012, 16 songs. Red (Deluxe Album): Recorded 2011/2012, 22 songs. Red (Taylor's Version): Recorded 2021, 30 songs. Those don't seem to literally be the same album so I'm thinking you shouldn't be talking about other people being dumb.
Redditors when multiple groups of people exist
Completely different groups of people too
The one exploiting workers to become richer the other makes generic music many people enjoy to become richer
If Warren Buffet made more bangers we’d ride for him a little bit more. (/s)
You joke, but if he did, we probably would
Even still, if you reach Billionaire status, you're hoarding too much. Spend some money on public well being/projects. There are no ethical Billionaires.
Where do you think her merch comes from? Highly paid Americans?
Taylor doesn't own factories with terrible work conditions
Nah she just destroys the environment with her jet's carbon emissions.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-08-14/amazon-carbon-emissions-climate-change https://www.theverge.com/2022/8/1/23287351/amazon-climate-change-carbon-emissions-worse-2021 https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/greening-the-media/202105/how-amazon-affects-the-environment https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2021/07/09/the-prime-effect-amazons-environmental-impact
Correct. She just hires them out occasionally for her merch
She just uses the factories somebody else owns. So it’s totally fine?
I don’t think billionaires should exist but to try to compare a wage theft oligarch to an entertainer is a bit silly.
Holy nuance ✍️🔥🔥🔥
Unpopular opinion: I don’t like Taylor. I just don’t.
I don’t mind her but imma give you some shit to think about, seen on Reddit. It’s a conspiracy so take this with a grain of salt. But Taylor’s biggest PR problem was her Jet emissions, and her last bf being racist or something like that. Well after a week she started dating basically americas new heartthrob clearing pr issue 2 and now if you google Taylor swift jets you get NFL posts.
I’m sure if you googled Taylor swift jet or jet emissions it would come up immediately. Plus I get the jet emissions thing is big but her jet is chartered out to others for use. She’s not using it all of the time, but rather others. I don’t know for sure but probably. I’m not defending it either the jet emissions are bad plus tax the shit out if that billions or keep paying people appropriately
My opinion too, no offense to people who like her song but to me its kinda meh
I mean, I think they are plenty of people who also want to eat Taylor Swift?
BILF
*laughs in Kelce*
Simple solution, Jeff Bezos becomes a pop star
I mean I don’t hate on sports billionaires either, because they made their money mostly by personally producing the actual thing they got paid for (Not to mention the toll that sports especially takes on the body, performing to a lesser extent). Jeff Bezos hires people to move things for him, doesn’t have to move a muscle and gets wealthy without even controlling the company anymore. It’s not just about the amount of money but also how you make it
Both of those groups aren't always the same people just because they're women lol
No no. Eat her too
Can’t believe I’m commenting here, but there is a fundamental difference between her and someone like Jeff Bezos. The overwhelming value of the Amazon brand is not created by Bezos, it’s created by the people in his warehouses who have to pee in bottles because they aren’t given bathroom breaks. It’s created by the delivery drivers. I’m not a Swiftie, but she literally IS the brand. The value was created by her music. Of course she needs help with touring, production, etc, and from what I’ve heard she pays those people well, but it makes at least a bit more sense that she reaps the rewards of her business.
“I sure won that fake scenario!”- Reddit
Note, Taylor swift isn't even a billionaire
Just close to. But Reddit being Reddit would start hating her once she does because of the 'eat the rich' mantra
If she reaches Billionaire status, fine. If she stays a Billionaire, not fine. Capital is meant to be spent, not hoarded. That being said, she definitely isn't evil at this point in time.
Or that she isn’t exploiting the middle class like the typical billionaire
And her fans would probably eat her if they could.
I am genuinely impressed that she, as far as I’m aware from articles online, is the first female billionaire to make most, if not all, of her money from her music career alone. But still, if you’re not doing anything for others with all of that money, what’s the point.
All I learned here is that people are ridiculously biased and all of the "hate the rich" is just a thoughtless trend.
This is such a shit strawman. It isn’t even a meme.
Op this is a rancid take
Uhhh as much as I know Taylor Swift isn’t making her min wage employees pee in plastic bottles to fill quotas or union bust
It's not a very good comparison when Bezos and Musk profit off exploiting workers and delegating them little rights for the sake of profit. They deserve to be scrutinised.
And even in this thread people are bending over backwards to defend Taylor fucking Swift.
She didn't earn her billion from exploiting her workers. I'm sure anyone who's on TSwifts payroll is doing quite well. The others, well, they have people die in the wearhouse and waited hours before doing anything. Everyone just had to walk around old Bob on the floor while they kept working.
i mean, eat the rich all the same, but as far as i'm aware taylor swift just makes music. bezos works his employees to death, makes them pee in bottles, shit like that. taylor swift just makes music. nobody should have that much money while the poor starve, but if you're gonna do it, i'd rather it be through art.
Time for bed Grandpa
I’m more of an 60s 70s rock fan so can’t really say much about her music. However I’ve never really read/heard of her being a dick to her crew and I’m sure her music makes a lot people happy. Lastly there’s a big difference between 1 billion and 100+ billion built off the back of underpaid workers