Top 20 Richest Women in Entertainment

My God, you guys are crazy! 90% of the posts here are off topic! You could probably turn gossip about Hugh Heffner into an Angelina vs. Jennifer thread.

okay…typo. but I meant to say “I’m so proud of these women.”

You know, Aniston can have all the money in the world, but she’ll still be a miserable, grasping and unfulfilled person. She’s needy, whiny and harbors grudges too much. She’s never been satisfied with anything she’s ever gotten.

She’ll end up as one of those rich grumpy old biddies that has only dogs and servants for company as they watch reruns of Friends in that old mansion by the sea.

#
113
bc Says:
January 18th, 2007 at 1:18 pm

Thanks for the info curly.

***

bc, I was sad to report actually what I wrote. I would expect a net worth of $110 million, regardless its source, makes one think 1.5 billion living under $1/day today around the world, of people who have no other misfortune other than being born into the wrong side of the fence, of babies who die in staggering numbers today because of preventable illnesses. Consider the poverty you observe in this country: number of children who do not have access to health insurance, the efforts to increase minimum wage so people can earn a “decent” (not rich) paycheck or people who chose to live in cold houses during winter because a warm house costs too much, all the while reading that one person is sitting on $110 million in the bank.

The publicly available information on the amount and quality of JA’s donations is sad, just sad, especially considering the apologetic messages, “gives in private, does not tell anyone”, the ones that are deemed worthy of public information are just terrible.

I am not suggesting that they should be giving all, but given the resources (institutional, economic and social) available in this society, one would expect many of the echelons in the wealth distribution would at least show some interest, work for public awareness for the survival of the others. Unfortunately, JA does not cut to that “people concerned list”, in my opinion.

All the best,
~curly

124
curly Says:

I do not know your identity, but if you plan to use “bold” in my message and use my name, kindly let other readers know that you are giving credit, I am not keen on posting my message over and over again.

Thanks.
~curly

curly -

Thank you for posting all those organizations. Now I get a good idea on what she donated.

I am shocked when I read that. Considering she is so wealthy, yet the amount of money she donated is dismal. If I were Jen, I would be ashamed. If I were Jen, I would not even let the world know how rich I am.

Another thing is, if Jen is a good friend of Oprah, why didnt she join in some of Oprah’s project? She does not need to do the planning. But she should at least give some money.

peace

128
This is Crazy Says:
______________
1) Dont lie. I suspect you are paid to post for the Aniston camp.

2) “You said you made 5M every 6 months?” Please, if you want to lie, at least tell a lie that makes sense. I am a CPA, I do lots of tax returns. “5M for 6 months”? Is this gross revenue? What about expenses? and how many lawyers contribute to this gross revenue?

3) I went back to see your posts. You claimed to be a lawyer. Dont lawyers have good reasoning? Why is your logic so flawed?

4) Lisa Kudrow is also married. She did NOT change her name. So, if Courtney Cox changed her name, and not on the list, why wasnt Lisa Kudrow on the list???

5) Jen Aniston NEVER donate to Oprah’s charities. Do your research, her name is NOT there.

Jared Pleeasee Pleeasee Do something about these people. This is starting to Become Disturbing.

128
This is Crazy Says:

January 18th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
1. I could care less about Jen Aniston and Jolie…They both annoy me and I think they are both publicity whores.

2. CC has her husbands name legally…Madonna and the others on this list that are married don’t.

3. Jen Aniston is one of Oprah’s biggest contributors every year (do the research)

4. Why is this an arguement about Jolie/Aniston. If anything I thought people would celebrate that their are 20 women who have shown that gender inequality is not a barrier. They have made their way in a man’s world.

5. I don’t give a **** if Angelina is God. I am from Africa, I am a lawyer who makes almost 5 million dollars every 6 months. But ask anyone who knows me and they don’t know where I donate or to whom I donate. It’s my contribution.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yeah, every attorney I KNOW who makes 5 million half a year, is on Just Jared psoting about it.

The argument for me is BEYOND Angelina vs Aniston.

My HUGE issue is this: Meryl Streep should be making 100 million NOT the Olsens NOT Aniston.

There is a HUGE disparity between women who don’t play the game and the ones who are all about branding.

I like J-LO but the woman has no acting talent and no singing talent and has been in one flop after another.

Yet who makes the millions? She does.

I like that she is a successful Latina but why can’t Salma Hayek make her level of money or Sonia Braga or Penelope Cruz who is really talented? THEY ARE NOT BRANDS.

Same with Aniston and Bullock. Why doesn’t Hillary Swank, Judi Dench or Meryl Streep make their money? Why the women who are average and less talented?

Because men still reward women who are not threatening.

With the exception of Oprah, Nicole Kidman and Julia Roberts, so many women on this list are undeserving of their millions.

When Meryl Streep makes 100 million then we can talk.

20
This is Crazy Says:

January 18th, 2007 at 10:02 am
All of you are absolutely ridiculous. I am not an Aniston fan nor do I like Jolie but you are all crazy. Angelina must not be here because she donates. WRONG!!! Net Worth is money that I have in the bank right now after my donations, after my taxes, it is my assets.
*********************
For someone who claims not to be a fan - you sure seem to know quite a lot about Maniston. Whatev!!

CLINIQUA, right on.

If celebs donate “privately” they are praised. Oooohh, they give their money quietly because they are so generous and modest. They don’t want anyone to know what a great person they truly are.
Yeah right, God forbid they should have to be burdened any further.
Their people are probably the ones making the donations on their behalf.
But if celebs want to bring awareness to the causes they support by making their donations public, they are criticized and demoralized?
WTF?????

136
AAA Says:

January 18th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I for one think that Oprah does not do enough, sorry but I think it was Forbes a while back that showed the percentage that these celebs gave and she gave 10 or 20%. That is NOT a lot out of a billion plus, all that does is reduce what she would have to pay in taxes.

Oprah should adopt because that is a far better legacy than some school thousands of miles away and visiting the students 2 or 3 times a year. Say what you will about Angelina and Madonna or Sharon Stone or Meg Ryan but they are putting their TIME into raising productive members of society, NOT just writing a check.

MS. O is also building a huge mega mansion in the Bahamas, taking up a whole damn island…who the hell is gonna live in that, her and Steadman and I guess Gayle? What a waste. She is a master manipulator publicizing every other show about what she is doing. Whom much is given, much is expected, so anything less than the minimum that she gives would be completely dreadful and appauling. Same goes for all the other people on this list. I’m just singling her out because she gets the most accolades and I think its undeserved.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

have to disagree with you on this.

Oprah gives millions to Moorehouse College.

Her millions to a school for girls in South Africa.

Her Angel Network, etc.

It is dangerous (big word) to suggest that a billionaire should give up their ocmfy lifestyle in order to be charitable.

The same argument has been used against the Jolie-Pitts. People found it insincere to go from refugees to a house in Malibu.

Part of what allows Angelina and the likes to do charity is because they ARE rich.

Bill Gates does not have to give up his billions to give.

It is discouraging to tell rich people that they have to give up what they work hard for in order to be charitable.

I work hard for my money but every month I give to charities but I still don’t give up my facials and massages. I can do both.

Oprah can own an island and still send abused, impoverished girls to school for free.

Part of the beauty of philanthropy and of the American Dream. We suceed and set an example for others to do the same.

134
Aiko Says:

Dear Aiko,

Let me recap the gist of my message “Gender equality is not all about who makes to the top, it is also about who hits to the glass ceiling”, since your message also seems to favor the notion that women have shown that gender inequality is not a barrier.

The following is hard data, about ordinary people, not about people whose net worth places them at the top 0.1% of wealth distribution in the US (kindly see my previous post on wealth distribution in the States).

From Current Population survey (http://www.bls.gov/bls/blswage.htm)

Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers by detailed occupation and sex

Arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media occupations : Median weekly earnings for men $885, median weekly earnings for women $735.

For 20 women “who have shown that gender inequality is not a barrier”, can you see how much women who, by your standards “could not show gender inequality is not a barrier”, are making?

All the best,
~curly

That list is missing SHANIA TWAIN! Maybe it’s cause she’s not in the public eye right now.
Shania is at least in the top 10. The Swiss business/financial media have her listed @ $400-$500 million and that’s without her husband Mutt Lange.
Forbes is just guessing at those numbers. They have no clue about investments, interest ect…

Janet Jackson has made many a private donation and gives endless money, the reason you don’t know about it is because she unlike Jolie doesn’t make it a media event for good press.

145
Russia Says:

January 18th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Janet Jackson has made many a private donation and gives endless money, the reason you don’t know about it is because she unlike Jolie doesn’t make it a media event for good press.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Good press or not, Jolie making an event about genocide in Darfur is good for Darfur.

Jolie making an event for international adoptions is good for int’l adoptions.

Jolie making giving birth in Namibia an event is good for Namibian tourism.

So is equally good of Steven Spielberg “making an event” of the survivors of the Holocaust. He could easily just give money but instead he talks about it every chance he gets and invites the press.

Thank God for press “events”.