Is Taylor Swift An Ethical Billionaire?
Let’s talk about the ethics of rich entertainers
In late December, websites started releasing articles claiming that Taylor Swift can become a billionaire by the end of her newly announced Era Tour.
The social media response sparked discourse amongst young people across social media. Some were praising Swift’s new billionaire status and acknowledging her hard work, storied career, and being a trailblazer in this new wealth class as a young woman. Others counter that we are supposed to have a societal understanding that there are no ethical billionaires, including Swift.
This begs the question for me
Are Taylor Swift and other entertainer billionaires like Lebron James, Jay- Z, Kylie Jenner, George Lucas, Paul McCartney, and Rihanna examples of trailblazers ethically entering a wealth class that is typically reserved for white men, or are they just as unethical and corrupt as the Elon Musks, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerbergs of the world?
I think it’s important to mention that many of the billionaires from the entertainment scene are from marginalized identities, so does adding that point change the ethics?
It’s easy to see why Zuckerberg and Bezos are unethical billionaires. They exploit American workers, they prey on their consumers' insecurities, and they disproportionately use public infrastructure — all while refusing to pay their fair share of taxes.
It’s also easy to see why their products are immoral when Zuckerberg’s company has to testify in front of Congress that they know suicides are directly caused by the content they advertise to teenagers on Instagram. Bezos allowed his employees to die in a tornado because Amazon wouldn’t close a factory during a natural disaster.
But what about Lebron James or Taylor Swift, why would their wealth be unethical?
Lebron runs and shoots basketballs on television, which seemingly isn’t an exploitative way to become a billionaire. Same with Swift and Rihanna, they just sing and dance. How could they be unethical billionaires? Entertainers may be rude to assistants and interns, but rudeness is not mass exploitation.
So are entertainers a case of ethical billionaires?
The short answer is no.
There is a simple argument that any form of massive wealth accumulation is ethically wrong.
There is also a more nuanced argument that the wealth of entertainers like Swift, Lebron, and Rihana is built on mass exploitation and human suffering just like the wealth of Bezos, Zuckerberg, and Musk.
Disclaimer, when I talk about wealth, I am not referring to people who have a couple million or even a couple tens of millions for themselves to retire and give their children a comfortable life. This amount of money has ethical issues, too, but I do recognize we live in a capitalistic society and a bit of extra individual wealth is security.
When I am talking about wealth, I am referring to entertainers and people who are worth the upper tens of millions, hundreds of millions, and billions of dollars. Lebron, Kylie, Rihanna, McCartney, Lucas, and Jay-Z are all worth over a billion dollars, and other entertainers are sitting on more money than we can imagine.
This brings us directly to the first argument: massive wealth hoarding in itself is immoral
Anyone with this level of wealth has more than enough money to provide a lavish lifestyle for themselves, friends, and family; which means any extra money accumulated is just a measure of greed.
A typical response to that comment is normally along the lines of: Why is greed intrinsically immoral?
The issue with greed at this level of wealth is that wealthy people are unnecessarily hoarding resources that can greatly relieve the suffering of countless others across the country and the world.
It would be different if they were saving money like you and me for emergencies, retirement, or buying a house. But at this level of wealth not only are all your and your loved ones' basic needs covered, but all reasonable material wants are also covered, too. I mean, we're talking about people with private planes, multiple mansions, and yachts; they aren’t hoarding their wealth for rainy days.
It’s immoral to not help others who are suffering, especially when helping others won’t come at any cost to yourself. Anyone who accumulates this level of wealth is doing exactly that.
Philosopher Peter Singer uses a parable to talk about our obligation as humans to help others who are suffering:
You notice a child has fallen into a shallow pool and appears to be drowning. To wade in and pull the child out would be easy but it will mean that you get your clothes wet and muddy. Do you have any obligation to rescue the child?
We ought to save the lives of strangers when we can do so at relatively little cost to ourselves.
Anyone who has garnered that much wealth can save hundreds of thousands of drowning children without any type of personal inconvenience.
I predict a common response to the first argument will be, “Celebrities do donate a lot of money to charities and other organizations to benefit the well-being of others.”
Obviously not enough. If they were donating a morally acceptable amount to those less fortunate around the world, with the only parameter being that it doesn't put themselves in harm's way, then they would still give away enough money that they wouldn’t be near a billion dollars.
You can donate 75% of a billion dollars and still be worth $250 million. For reference, to be a member of the top 1% a person only has to be worth $11.1 million. A billionaire could donate $750 million dollars and still have 20x more wealth than other one-percenters in our country; there is no excuse for being worth that much money while 63% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck.
On top of that, many wealthy Americans, including entertainers, use charity donations as a tax write-off, according to this 2019 paper by Nicolas Duquette of the University of Southern California. Basically, the wealthy, celebrities included, use charity writeoffs for good publicity, attending super expensive charity events with other celebrities, and buying expensive meals and merchandise, all while avoiding paying their taxes.
Yes, according to Forbes the ultra-rich can attend ultra-expensive “charity” events and buy ultra-expensive meals with other rich people and write the cost off as a charity donation
Most public services and welfare programs for poor Americans rely upon tax money and not charity. Therefore the celebrity charity argument fails not only because it actively helps celebrities hide their wealth but it also actively limits resources that are used to help those suffering economically.
But do wealthy entertainers make their wealth ethically?
Again the short answer is no.
Lebron James and Michael Jordan are both billionaires through playing basketball and endorsements, specifically Nike shoe deals. Both seemingly just earned their wealth through athleticism and hard work. Lebron, specifically, has used his platform to spread awareness about social justice issues and racism and has used his wealth to open a school for at-risk children.
Does this sound ethical enough?
Until you remember that James and Jordan's Nike shoes were made by exploiting Asian and South American workers with what has been described as slave labor and human rights abuse. In 2020, the Chinese government forced members of the Uighurs ethnic group being held in concentration camps to work in a shoe factory that makes Nike shoes.
Not so ethical anymore.
How about Kylie Jenner? She is a billionaire Instagram influencer who makes her wealth from modeling, reality tv show acting, advertisement, and selling her fashion brand; this seems innocent enough.
Until you learn that she's been accused, multiple times, of failing to pay the Bangladeshi workers who make her merchandise.
How about Rihanna? All she does is sing and dance. Until you learn that her massive Fenty Brand, which made her a billionaire, is under investigation in India for using child labor.
There’s a reason why Taylor Swift’s merchandise is made in Honduras, and not to mention that she's a notorious carbon polluter with her total flight emissions for 2022 at 8,293.54 tonnes or 1,184.8 times more than the average person’s total annual emissions
I could have used many white male celebrities too, but there seems to be a certain praise and acceptance given to the ultra-wealthy from marginalized identities. There’s a notion that ultra-wealthy people of color and women are somehow different than rich white guys like Bezos, Zuckerberg, and Musk or even rich white entertainers like Steven Spielberg, Adm Sandler, and Tom Brady.
My point with this article is to remind everyone that rich people are wealthy first and foremost before any other identity. They become rich from the suffering of black and brown communities around the world just like the rich people we hate. They dodge taxes and enable wealth inequality here in the U.S. just like any other wealth hoarder.
