Things that can make you wonder why...

chemistry_geek

chemistry_geek

Registered
CNN has an article here

http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/News/05/02/clinton.talk.show/index.html

about President Clinton thinking about hosting a talk show on NBC. The article says Oprah Winfrey recently renewed her contract for her show where she is paid MORE THAN $125,000,000/year.

Translation of $125,000,000/year:

Assuming an average 40 hour work week and working 52 weeks/year is 40 x 52 = 2080 working hours in a year.

$125,000,000/2080 hours = $60096.15/hour

$60096.15/hour/60 minutes/hour = $1001.60/minute

$1001.60/minute/60 seconds/minute = $16.69/second.

WHY should anyone make that kind of money? You could NEVER use it all yourself. You could NEVER buy enough. Does she donate to charity? David Letterman makes around $30,000,000/year and I think he is much more entertaining than Oprah.

Why? why? why? Kind of makes her sound almost, but not as greedy as ol' Billy Gates. I suppose life should be good at the top of the food chain. I just can't imagine what it would be like to make that kind of money. I'd still wear blue jeans everyday, T-shirts and, tennis shoes and work in a lab. I just can't imagine it...
 
what scares me is that if clinton has a show, people will be stupid enough to watch it....

Not me... 8 yrs of him in the white house was MORE than enuf. ;)
 
When you see people getting paid this sort of ludicrous money, you can only stay sane by telling yourself that they are spending it on products, services and investments and thus keeping the whole thing going for us little guys. You spend a few million bucks on a house, you get to hire dozens of tradesmen, and so on ...

This is a lot easier to handle when you don't think about it too hard. The world is going down a very, very bad path.

Hey! If Oprah were willing to spare two minutes out of her day, it would be enough to pay for all my university debts and fix my car and get me that little scooter I've had my eye on...

:p
 
Yes, people would watch "The Clinton Show", and with the same morbid curiosity with which they watch the Jerry Springer Show. Everyone knows about Clinton's embarassing behavior, that's why they would watch the show, to see if there is some hint or insight into the behavior of a man that had REAL POWER, i.e. a President of the United States. They would want to know if his (extra-marital) experiences (and finally getting caught in front of the world) somehow transformed him in any way, reshaped his personality. I think the show would be a success, simply because of the sensationalism of Clinton's past, not necessarily because content of the show.
 
I would just like to add a plug for my own personal social engineering plan.
We start with the premise that when the vast majority of folks die, they leave their worldly goods to more than one person. Usually they divvy everything up among their relatives.
So say Bill Gates is worth $100 billion when he croaks, and he leaves it to 4 heirs. Each of them gets $25 billion. Then when each of them dies, they leave their fortune to 5 heirs. Instead of one man worth $100 billion, we now have 20 folks worth $5 billion apiece.
So my proposal is, kill the rich. Keep on killing them until some of that wealth reaches us "common folks." That's real "trickle-down economics."
Anybody care to join me in this grand scheme?
:D
 
Killing the rich or waiting for them to die won't help spread the wealth that much. Uncle Sam will get his unfair share of the inheritance tax and find ways to purchase more $400 hammers. I believet the $400 hammer comment was mentioned by President Reagan during the Iran-Contra scandal, though I'm not too sure about that. I do know that it was mentioned somewhere in the news during the Reagan era that the U.S. govt. paid for $400 hammers ON PAPER to shuffle money to "other places". I love creative accounting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top