Skip to comments.The Mind of Your Basic Hollywood Liberal
Posted on 07/12/2012 4:43:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
Richard Kind is a funny, talented actor. I had the pleasure of working with him when I did a cameo on the show "Spin City," where Kind co-starred. He was thoughtful and helpful on set, even though I was a dreaded non-lefty.
Fast forward to this year's White House Correspondents' dinner. Pleased to be invited, Kind gave an interview to The Hollywood Reporter. After praising President Barack Obama as "the smartest man in the room," Kind offered his opinion on what issue he "cares most about": "The disparity between the ultra-rich and the next level is as disgraceful as anything that has gone on in our history. Now maybe some of them can control my life, my career, my employment, but I have to tell you something is wrong. I don't know how it got wrong, but something is wrong."
"The next level"? What does that even mean? "As disgraceful as anything that has gone on in our history?" Right up there with slavery, the World War II relocation camps for Americans of Japanese descent and the fact that the race-hustling Rev. Al Sharpton has a television show on MSNB-Hee Haw?
First, despite the primacy of Kind's concern, most Americans do not care about the "wealth gap." Only 15 percent of Americans, according to a Gallup poll, consider this an important issue. Far more Americans worry about economic growth and unemployment -- as opposed to worrying about whether someone has more stuff than they do.
Besides, what exactly is the gap? Is it getting bigger or smaller? What is the appropriate gap? How does the United States compare to other countries?
According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (a consortium of 34 economically developed countries): "In OECD countries today, the average income of the richest 10 percent of the population is about nine times that of the poorest 10 percent." In the United States, the gap between the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent is 14 to one -- about the same as the gap between the rich and the poor in Israel and Turkey. For countries like Mexico and Chile, the gap is 27 to one.
True, the wealth gap grew over the last 20 years, but the so-called "Great Recession" was less than kind to the rich. From 2007 to 2009, the top 1 percent's share of the national income declined from 23.5 percent to 18.12 percent -- a drop of 23 percent. Their household wealth fell by 30 percent. Average real income for the top percentile declined 36.3 percent, versus a decline of 11.6 percent for the remaining 99 percent.
Let's hope Kind was joking when he talked about the alleged benefit of "one billionaire" leaving his or her money to the government: "I'm a big fan of education; I think more money should be poured into education. I think the environment is a mess and is spiraling downward. And I think our tax situation, you know we are in debt a lot. But I tell you, you cut off one billionaire, and he might be able to cover everything. If that billionaire were to die and leave his money to the government, all our problems may be solved."
Just "one billionaire"? Add up the net worth of Forbes' top 10 richest Americans. Their total net worth comes to $291 billion. The current projected annual deficit is $1.5 trillion -- five times the combined net worth of the 10 richest Americans. More money in education? Outside of Switzerland, the United States spends more money on K-12 than any other OECD country.
In 1985, a federal judge in Kansas City ordered the school district to close what he called an "appalling" gap in the quality of urban schools compared to that of suburban schools. Fox's John Stossel wrote: "The bureaucrats renovated school buildings, adding enormous gyms, an Olympic swimming pool, a robotics lab, TV studios, a zoo, a planetarium and a wildlife sanctuary. They added intense instruction in foreign languages. They spent so much money that when they decided to bring more white kids to the city's schools, they didn't have to resort to busing. Instead, they paid for 120 taxis. Taxis!
"What did spending billions more accomplish? The schools got worse. In 2000, 15 years and $2 billion later, the Kansas City school district failed 11 performance standards and lost its academic accreditation for the first time in the district's history."
Kind is not a stupid man. He graduated from Northwestern, where he studied pre-law. He is, of course, entitled to an opinion. But then so is actor Brad Pitt, who once refreshingly said: "You shouldn't speak until you know what you're talking about. Reporters ask me what I feel China should do about Tibet. Who cares what I think China should do? I'm a f--king actor! They hand me a script. I act. I'm here for entertainment. Basically, when you whittle everything away, I'm a grown man who puts on makeup."
And that's a wrap.
‘...actor Brad Pitt, who once refreshingly said: “You shouldn’t speak until you know what you’re talking about. Reporters ask me what I feel China should do about Tibet. Who cares what I think China should do? I’m a f—king actor! They hand me a script. I act. I’m here for entertainment. Basically, when you whittle everything away, I’m a grown man who puts on makeup.”’
Well, at least one man in Hollywood gets it.
Education needs more money? I've been hearing this for fifty years - we already spend more money per student than any industrialized nation in the world and what do we get for our money? Young skulls-full-of-mush!
Kind is lucky enough to have found a niche playing nebbishy menschen - and seems to make a good living at it. He should shut his cake-hole and collect his paycheck and let us all think he is smart, rather than talking like this and revealing himself to be an idiot.
Brad used to get it - before Angelina changed his mind? I think as these types get older and wealthier, just doing their job is not enough. They want professional acclaim, awards and such, and look for causes to get behind in order to be taken seriously.
Years ago on the Merv Griffith talk show, Arther Treacher was the Co Host.
On one show, a popular and VERY self-important actor was making himself ridiculous describing ‘acting’ as if it was brain surgery or something equally difficult and crucial to human well-being.
Mockingly, Merv turned to Treacher and said: ‘Is that how you approached acting?’
Treacher said: “No, not at all. It’s ...’show up, say the words, get the money and go home’.”
Sage from South Central BUMP
Everyone has a visceral need to “matter”.
And if that significance isn’t in your relationship with the Creator,
then you’ll worship false gods, including yourself.
What kind of an idiot like Kind who makes a nice piece of change complains about those who have little , but yet he doesn’t give himself a budget and then hand the rest to the needy.
All of these rich Hollywood freaks want to take MY money and give it to the unfortunate, while they insist on Green Tea and Roses in their $5,000 dollar a night hotel rooms.
Give them your friggin money if you feel so sorry for them.
Stop talking and put your money where your mouth is Hollywood.
> I think more money should be poured into education.
Here’s a clue for Richard Kind.
Richard, no matter how much money you give the government school collective, it will never, EVER, NEVER be enough. Never.
The government school collectives are a monetary black hole.
IMO, he's speaking about the Hollywood elite; those producers and directors who are filthy rich as opposed to him, just ....... rich. The Hollywood liberals don't give a rat's patootie or even think about about John Q. Public except in terms of box office receipts or Neilsen ratings.
Most of the “ultra-rich” that I see out there (e.g., Soros, Buffett, Gates) are whole-hearted supporters of Obama and the DemocRATS.
Last I checked, none of them voluntarily paid more that their “fair share” in taxes, either.
If being uber-rich bothers these smug idiots, the solution is easy: Give YOUR money away to the “less fortunate” and take a real job. Let my hard-earned money alone.
Totally agree with you on that point. To further their misunderstanding with paying more taxes, if they get 20mm and the govt takes 10mm, they look at it as they still have 10mm. Hell, who can't live on 10mm?
We put way too much value on being an entertainer, then they get in a "capitalism war" about justifying more money, then they bash capitalism.
Well, which is it?
that = than
Here’s the thing. The Buffets of the world structure their lives so they do not have that much income. Their money is protected by the army of lawyers they employ. So, their tax rates are kept artificially low and they can bleat about the “unfairness of it all”. Horse hockey! No one keeps them from stroking a big check to the government. Not one person.
Giving in to envy is a short path to unending misery. The cold hard truth is completely at odds with the messages put out by Hollywood and advertisers. Most of us, in fact nearly all of us, are never going to have a mansion in the hills overlooking the Pacific. We're not going to wear $10,000 ensembles to opening nights. We're not going to drive cars with price tags well into six figures. We're not going to marry someone with supermodel looks.
Here's the dirty little secret Hollywood and Madison Ave. don't want you to realize. Absolutely none of those things are necessary to have a happy and fulfilling life. Gasp! Don't let that get out - why, the unwashed public might stop buying their products and services and buying-into their BS. So be happy with the gifts you have. Sure, strive to improve yourself, your capabilities, your opportunities. But take pleasure from the journey, not the destination.
The government school collectives are a monetary black hole.
That’s the same way I describe a recreational boat.
Here’s one more thing about Buffet that no on really talks about. He has been trying to challenge the IRS for something like 9 years - and has not been paying taxes the entire time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.