That's some real commitment to transphobia! Though I am once again reminding you that you do not, under any circumstances, "gotta hand it to them."

Love my trans comrades! :trans-heart:

    • Quimby [any, any]
      ·
      3 years ago

      being famous is a good job. I should have chosen that instead of choosing to not be famous.

      • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Love how “being a Youtuber” is a viable career for kids now that all its disruption is done and it has become fully mature in its ability to be exploited and controlled by Capital

        • KurtVonnegut [comrade/them]
          ·
          3 years ago

          ?

          Are people not allowed to enjoy art just because it's on a capitalist streaming site? Because in that cast all art is bad...

          • Thisisnotadrilbit [none/use name]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Socialist aren’t supposed to like popular things produced by capital. You have to live your whole life being an edgy teenager. But I really don’t give a shit About what other people think about my preferences

          • Aryuproudomenowdaddy [comrade/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            I understand it's not for everyone but I loved it. Welcome to the Internet is such a mood and I now frequently have "My stupid friends are having stupid children" on repeat in my head.

          • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            why should someone with more than enough money have made more, merit =/= excessive compensation

            • Thisisnotadrilbit [none/use name]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Except he actually made Netflix way more than he was paid. Does he not deserve the to be paid fairly for his labor? Are you also one of these “Hasan lives in big house bad ppl? Athletes get paid too much.”

                • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  This is a very important distinction to make. Bo performed a lot of labor to make this show. It was over a year of work. A $4 million salary is still an insane amount of money, but regardless the value he created for Netflix was significantly more than what he received.

                  However, this is only looking at things monetarily. The reason Bo’s special is able to be worth so much is that Netflix hires hundreds of employees to organize and consolidate the attention of their customers, which is then lent to Bo with the understanding that Bo will participate in this attention cycle. So Bo actually gains a lot of social capital out of this exchange as well. Compared to every other worker in the chain, he gets pretty much all of it.

                  But here’s the important part: that social capital is a loan. An investment. It will let him retain enough clout and prestige to do another Netflix special in a few years, but if he stops producing or begins to actively undermine the system, he will be cut off and forgotten. You could say that even compared to the executive who pay him he ends up with more social capital, but there is a difference between being the user of social capital and being the owner. Bo is the user. The worker. The faceless Netflix CEO is the owner. I don’t know anything about the Netflix CEO, but I’d imagine they keep their public life pretty low key. Despite this, they are in control of more social capital than Bo Burnham could ever utilize.

                • BreadpilledChadwife [they/them]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  Bo is above line and he knows it. Even if he owned all of that equipment prior (pretty sure he didn’t), that’s half a career’s worth of accumulation from someone who’s had millions of dollars put forward to promote him.

                • Thisisnotadrilbit [none/use name]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  So the person who makes the paintbrush also deserves a cut of every painters work? I don’t remember reading that in Kapital

                    • Thisisnotadrilbit [none/use name]
                      ·
                      3 years ago

                      Yeah I agree with that. Just don’t think they would be making money specifically from Bo or the production of any of his specials.

        • JoeByeThen [he/him, they/them]
          ·
          3 years ago

          The company also evaluates its programs by “efficiency,” which balances a show’s reach with its price-tag. On that scale, Chappelle’s special scored 0.8 — less than the break-even score of 1. By comparison, Burnham’s “Inside” scored 2.8.

          Labor is entitled to all it creates.

          • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Bo did not create the social capital that put his work at that valuation. His work is amplified in value by the number of attention hours it can capture. Bo is famous, but he’s not that famous. He couldn’t have had that sort of reach with an independent release

              • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
                ·
                3 years ago

                Personally I can recognize complicated labor relations while also being resentful of people who don’t struggle to feed their families and waste money on random luxuries

                  • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
                    ·
                    3 years ago

                    No, you nerd, not unless your beer budget is large enough to remind me some massive systemic difference between us (if this is the case, you would have much larger problems than my resentment). There are probably people in the world who would resent both of us for things we don’t really consider luxuries. It’s not a logical impulse nor should it be a guiding motivation, but I’d still hope people can at least sympathize.

                    Also, are beaches not free where you are? Not trying to be shitty. I’m genuinely curious.

            • JoeByeThen [he/him, they/them]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Uh huh, so the question is why are y'all focusing on one of the workers instead of the corporate entity sapping away that profit from the people that built that distribution mechanism?

        • budoguytenkaichi [he/him,they/them]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Is it still tho?

          1 mil is certainly nothing to sneeze at even now, and I wouldn't turn it down of course, but these days you'd have to invest it pretty wisely and/or live pretty frugally to stretch it out over an entire lifetime.

          • ClathrateG [none/use name]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Across every age group, the average future lifetime earnings of women with Master's or PhD degrees is substantially lower than that for men with undergraduate degrees. For example, women aged 26 to 35 years with higher degrees have average lifetime earnings of £803,000, whereas men of the same age with undergraduate level qualifications have average lifetime earnings of around £1,160,000.