Lately, I have noticed that there is one industry that practices free market capitalism without a blush, is lightly regulated (if at all) and many of the people that are involved with it have become very rich. In fact, I can't think of a better argument for free market capitalism than this industry.....have you guessed it? I'm talking about Hollywood and the Entertainment Industry (which includes sports, too).
Think about it. The Entertainment Industry has no price controls on movies, videos, CDs, DVDs, jealously protects its property rights (remember the lawsuit against Napster?), is lightly regulated (in fact, any attempt to do so brings cries of censorship combined with charges of attacks on First Amendment rights and/or whining and howls of protest from some very high profile names). In addition, the Entertainment Industry is one of the leading exporters of American products in our economy.
People cringe when they find that the CEO of some large corporation takes home 20, 30 or 40 million dollars a year, but who balks when they find that some entertainers are making that much for making a single movie?
If a movie star isn't drawing in a crowd, their career tanks and no one talks about protecting jobs. If a baseball team doesn't pack 'em in, they get sold (sometimes with the taxpayer footing the bill) and no one talks about corporate welfare or greed.
Yet....isn't it odd that the very practitioners of this free-for-all free market capitalism, which would make even conservative economists, e.g. Thomas Sowell, proud are the very people who are ready to jump in and denounce "greed" in Corporate America, are willing to testify before Congress about the "need" for one type of government interference (or in the popular parlance, "regulation") in one part of the economy or another (but, if you notice, NEVER the Entertainment Industry!). The Hollywood stars, who benefit the most from free market capitalism and are the perfect example of the benefits of a free market economy are amongst its biggest critics.
Does this strike anyone else as being odd or hypocritcal?
Think about it. The Entertainment Industry has no price controls on movies, videos, CDs, DVDs, jealously protects its property rights (remember the lawsuit against Napster?), is lightly regulated (in fact, any attempt to do so brings cries of censorship combined with charges of attacks on First Amendment rights and/or whining and howls of protest from some very high profile names). In addition, the Entertainment Industry is one of the leading exporters of American products in our economy.
People cringe when they find that the CEO of some large corporation takes home 20, 30 or 40 million dollars a year, but who balks when they find that some entertainers are making that much for making a single movie?
If a movie star isn't drawing in a crowd, their career tanks and no one talks about protecting jobs. If a baseball team doesn't pack 'em in, they get sold (sometimes with the taxpayer footing the bill) and no one talks about corporate welfare or greed.
Yet....isn't it odd that the very practitioners of this free-for-all free market capitalism, which would make even conservative economists, e.g. Thomas Sowell, proud are the very people who are ready to jump in and denounce "greed" in Corporate America, are willing to testify before Congress about the "need" for one type of government interference (or in the popular parlance, "regulation") in one part of the economy or another (but, if you notice, NEVER the Entertainment Industry!). The Hollywood stars, who benefit the most from free market capitalism and are the perfect example of the benefits of a free market economy are amongst its biggest critics.
Does this strike anyone else as being odd or hypocritcal?
