Sorry, will have to disagree with you there. A tiny tiny fraction of movies/shows do have lasting value. They are the classics and they will live forever. But again, it's a very small fraction of the junk that comes out of the industry. And also, it's people who decide what has value to them.
As for over compensation, there is no such thing in a free society. In a capitalist system wealth is acquired, not given, and you are free to acquire as much of it as you want provided people are giving it to you of their free will. But you could say that govt is vastly over compensated for what it does, which is mostly nothing.
> As for over compensation, there is no such thing in a free society. In a capitalist system wealth is acquired, not given, and you are free to acquire as much of it as you want provided people are giving it to you of their free will.
I have an issue with that. Jobs like “Fireman” or “Nurse” produce outputs of much greater value (extrinsic and intrinsic) than do actors — who produce nothing tangible.
The former saves lives, the latter lives in a world of pretend, and helps us to do the same.
A welder welds iron plates onto ocean liners, which carry goods to market. A pop star sings — is essentially a minstrel — and produces noting of value beyond a pleasant (or maybe even not-so-pleasant) noise.
I believe “Entertainment” is one of the chief causes of the decline of our Western Civilization. When we were producing things of lasting value, we were strong. When we began producing “bread-and-circuses” like the Romans eventually did, we could mark our civilization’s decline from that date.