“This ‘groundbreaking’ AI proposal that they gave us yesterday, they proposed that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get one day’s pay, and their companies should own that scan, their image, their likeness and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity on any project they want, with no consent and no compensation. So if you think that’s a groundbreaking proposal, I suggest you think again.”
I guess I wasn’t one of the vast majority of people who lived in L.A. I was just working crew and occasional actor. My money went to things like rent and food. Weirdly, most of my colleagues were in the same boat.
Now admittedly, there are millions of people in L.A., but a lot of the ones in the entertainment industry sure as hell weren’t passing money around, we were barely making a living.
Yeah, a living in one of the most expensive cities in the world.
You could be living a cheaper life anywhere else, but you feel entitled to live in LA.
No sympathy from me. Spread out.
I live in a cheaper place now. Indiana. My quality of life is not especially different. I didn’t feel entitled to live in L.A., I went where I could put my skills to good use. Being paid a low wage in L.A. was a higher wage than a low wage in Indiana, but the cost of living is also higher.
Maybe don’t make guesses about how other people live their lives.
And let me guess- I shouldn’t have moved to Indiana, I should have moved to Botswana or something if I don’t want to feel “entitled.”
No, moving to Indiana is fine. Thank you for sharing.
So I don’t feel “entitled” to live in a first-world country where I have things like running water and electricity? Seems like the same sort of “entitled” as living in a city where you have a job that you think is the best job for what you want to do with your life. Shouldn’t I be working in a strip mine in Mongolia or not ever complain about my life?
Or is Los Angeles somehow a special case?
I just said Indiana was fine.
California is the most expensive state to live in. People don’t need to live there and would be using capital more efficiently elsewhere.
I’m not in the camp of “all or nothing.” I think magnitude matters and we can all be doing more to reduce the disparity in wealth besides “making more money.”
If California was totally depopulated, another state would be the most expensive state and you could make the same claim.
Not really. It’s supply and demand. Even if another state were the new most expensive, that doesn’t mean it will be as expensive as California is now.
Okay, what is the acceptable level of “expensive” where people have a right to complain about not being paid enough?