"Here's a small charge for stopping that meteor."

[deird_lj]

So, I've been watching Lois&Clark, and just got to the episode where the guy gets Superman's powers and starts using them irresponsibly.
(...which isn't really specific enough. Uh, the episode in the second season when that happens.)

And Superman sits him down and gives him a stern talking-to about "right and wrong", which in this case basically means "Do not charge people $37.50 every time you save their life!"

Question for people reading this: is it okay to charge people for doing the superhero thing?

On the one hand, you have Clark Kent, and Buffy Summers, who'd be appalled at the idea.
Then there are people like Angel, who does that every week.
And then there's Peter Parker, who doesn't exactly charge any money, but still uses his superhero identity as a great way to make extra cash, by selling photos of Spiderman.

...I can't really decide who I agree with.

So, what do people think?

Comments

[http://users.livejournal.com/woman_of_/]

How much do you charge for saving someone, their life, soul, whatever? What is the right price? How much do you charge for saving the world?

Do either Angel or Peter Parker save people who cannont afford to save them? Then yes they do. Is is more noble to save people without charging them? I guess, but if you need to make a living from it, and not keep your 'secret identity' secret, then I have no problem with it. A starving hero is no use to anyone really. If they need the money to survive and don't mind being exposed, then charge those who can pay.

[rahirah]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to get paid for performing a community service. We pay police officers and firefighters and soldiers, after all. I think the point where it gets dicey is if you see the oncoming meteor and say, "Hey, if you don't give me $37.50, I'm going to let that meteor squash your house."

And there's also the point that if the community pays you, then the community gets some say in how you perform services for it. So for superheroes who value their autonomy, that's something to consider before accepting a paycheck: do you agree with the agenda of the person signing it?

[http://users.livejournal.com/_sabik_/]

Both of which are neatly avoided by the selling of photos.

(Also, in case the question is not entirely hypothetical — we know our host can leave imprints in solid objects, as per the previous post...)


η

[powerofthebook.livejournal.com]

That's a difficult question! I'm trying to translate it into more human terms...an ER doctor saves lives every day. They, however, have to charge, through their organization, in order to keep functioning. A policeman or firefighter saves lives, but they're paid through taxpayer dollars in order to keep functioning.

It's a definite problem. Batman was loaded, so he was A-okay on that front. Buffy Summers wasn't, and therefore struggled. When she finally had a bit of funding, however, (in the comics, anyway), she ended up stealing to get more. And then there's Angel, who saw the extra funding from an evil source and believed he could take it and take down the beast from inside. Since what Angel does could be construed as a public service in some ways, if he went public, he'd certainly be a good candidate for a government contract. Unfortunately, I think he'd chafe at the number of restrictions and regulations that would be placed upon him, and the insurance against collateral damage would be fairly large...

I think it depends on circumstances, in some ways. If someone comes searching for Angel's help to hunt down a pack of vampires, I would think he'd be within his rights to charge something. If Angel was out patrolling, however, and saved a hapless teen from being chomped on by a vampire, he'd have no real basis to charge.

Again, it's a difficult question. On the one hand, a world needs heroes. On the other hand, those heroes need to eat and pay their rent.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

Superheroes shouldn't charge for their services. Their services should be free at the point of use and funded out of general taxation.

:-)

[owenthurman.livejournal.com]

should be free at the point of use and funded out of general taxation

Just like police protection is and health care should be.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

In civilised countries, healthcare already is free at the point of use. :-)

Seriously, superheroes charging the people they rescue is an awful idea. What happens if a helpless victim is too poor to afford their fees? What if they have a choice of saving either a wealthy banker or a poor single mother, but not enough time to save both? Would you really want to save someone from an exploding volcano then bankrupt them because they have to go into debt to repay your fees?

Much better to set up a National Superhero Service funded from taxation. You can still set it up so the heroes only have to work for the NSS for a contracted number of hours per week and can be freelance the rest of the time...

[owenthurman.livejournal.com]

In civilised countries, healthcare already is free at the point of use

You misspelled civilized.

a National Superhero Service funded from taxation

Or they could be funded like commercial television and NASCAR by selling space on their skin tight latex uniforms for corporate logos. When they rescue someone and get interviewed on the eleven o'clock news they could talk about which brand of cigarettes they endorse.

[parcae-lj.livejournal.com]

The important thing to bear in mind here, I think, is that Peter Parker, Buffy, etc are all providing a service (enforcement of law and order) normally covered by the government. They have to do this because the government in their universes is fantastically incompetent and ignorant, on a scale which would amount to complete anarchy in the real world. This is the only explanation for why Peter Parker can be a useful asset when his only means for sniffing out crime is a police scanner (which naturally can only detect crimes of which the police have already been informed), or why Buffy can select a random cemetery and be sure of finding her evening quota of demons to kill. Violence in their universes has reached the point that it is possible to find criminals in flagrante delicto by virtually random selection.

In other words, under normal circumstances, Buffy and Spiderman would be funded by taxation. Trying to find another system of funding, whatever it may be, will inevitably create injustices because of the problem of market failure. Law and order is a public good - it benefits everyone collectively that Buffy is out in the cemeteries, but no individual party benefits enough to create a market for her services.

The only real solution would be for all superheroes to be government agents, which would be boring. So fantasy universes create a series of excuses to hide the fact that the entire concept behind independent superheroes makes no sense.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_sabik_/]

Actually, Sunnydale is a fairly small town, it probably only has the one cemetery, and as far as I've heard the predator-prey numbers work out pretty consistent with what's shown in the show.

The real question is, what happens elsewhere? If Buffy's in Sunnydale, how is Cleveland going? Is Sunnydale somehow special? Or is there a curse associated with the Slayer, that bad things will happen around her? Or, as you suggest, is the rest of the country going really badly, with the government impotent to deal with the problem for some reason?


η

[deird1]

Sunnydale is a fairly small town, it probably only has the one cemetery

...actually, no.

It has twelve.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_sabik_/]

Twelve cemeteries in a town of 38,500? That seems a little excessive... I guess they do have an unusually high mysterious death rate, but still...

η

[madripoor-rose.livejournal.com]

Skimming Cereta's friendslist.

I always liked Booster Gold, who came back in time to be a superhero...and get rich off marketing, merchandising, and acting opportunities once he became a famous hero.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_sabik_/]

For heaven's sake, if you're going back in time, take a couple of newspapers or memorise a few choice tidbits of financial and/or sports information.

What else is the stock-market for, if not to finance time-travelling superheroes?

η

[madripoor-rose.livejournal.com]

Heh. Booster actually did that for seed money to start up his own corporation.

[taiba.livejournal.com]

Well, as long as they know up-front that they will be charged...

I mean, if being a superhero is your only marketable skill, what else are you supposed to do? Particularly in a place like America.

[taiba.livejournal.com]

Remember also that superheroes aren't taxpayer-funded, unlike our other public services :-p

[lavastar.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I'm of the opinion that there's no easy answer - on the one hand, you shouldn't make people pay you for doing what's right, but on the other, how else is someone fighting evil supposed to make a living? Unless you have crazy-ass skills, you're not going to be able to have another job.

The solution is to be born fabulously wealthy, or become wealthy before you get all superhero-y. Like Batman.

[padawanspider.livejournal.com]

I would consider the superhero thing a use of one's native talents. Similar to use of native talents in a job.

However, I also think there has to be terms of agreement in order to charge a fee.

Tax funding makes the most sense - that appears to be what happens in The Incredibles.

Darkwing Duck kinda-sorta worked for SHUSH (which is equivalent to the FBI), but I don't know that his hours would have paid the bills. My guess is that he had an inheritance enough for day-to-day living and needed the gig with SHUSH to pay the mortgage after he adopted Gosalyn.

[silveronthetree.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I don't really think it is right to charge people for the superhero thing. But then people need to make a living somehow. Didn't Angel initially charge people so he could employ his non super-powered helpers? He would have probably got by ok just helping people. But Cordelia needed some sort of income to live. Clark Kent had a job at the Daily Planet so he didn't need to worry about money to live, and he could turn some coal into a diamond (or ask Batman) if he was desperate. I don't know enough about Peter Parker to comment, but I thought that he needed the money from the photos to be able to eat/live.

I think the important thing is that they wouldn't refuse to help anyone who couldn't pay if they truly needed it.

[neutralalienist.livejournal.com]

I think it depends on the situation.

If you save something without them asking you too, and then demand payment? Bad.

If they come to you, knowing they need to pay for your services? Fine.

Angel was reluctant, but I think Doyle had a good point - if it's just a service, instead of a dashing hero, it's easier to accept it all and move on.

Besides, heroes need to eat too.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_sabik_/]

Agreed.

At least $37.50 sounds like a reasonable charge... In a market failure (few superheroes and/or demanding payment after the job is done), one would expect much worse charges than that...


η

[angearia.livejournal.com]

I think plotting to profit from saving a person's life diminishes their heroism. Yes, this is true for heroes in real life (cops, firefighters), but we're talking superheroes here. Larger than life metaphors. Charging for their services makes them less super, less epic and noble. Their mission is to get paid? Woohoo.

From Laney

[(Anonymous)]

:D !!

I'd forgotten how awesomely cool that show was in its earlier seasons...




(oh, and I wanted you to look at this:

http://www.fanpop.com/spots/huddy/videos/4954476

It's three scenes from the episode that just aired in the US. I know you don't like spoilers, but

1. they don't spoil very much, I promise, and

2. I actually only want you to watch the first scene,
which is the very start of the show,
up until House starts talking to the patient,
at which point you could stop watching,
which means you wouldn't get spoiled at all.

And it is SOOOOOOO good. YOU, particularly, would like it, I think. And I need to squee at you.)

[deird1]

Hee! How very fun!

House is so great...



I'd forgotten how awesomely cool that show was in its earlier seasons...

What do you mean its earlier seasons? It was awesomely cool THE ENTIRE TIME.

From Laney

[(Anonymous)]

Did you like the 'jumping the shark' bit?

I got tired of L&C in the later seasons. Sorry...

[http://users.livejournal.com/_sabik_/]

Guys, we're drifting from the topic here! The topic is, "should deird1 sell photos of her superhero persona in order to be able to devote herself fully to saving the world".

With the Earth itself trembling and Elf apparently poisoned by alien ectoplasm, I don't think this is the time to chatter about TV shows!

η

From Laney

[(Anonymous)]

Well, I have three comments to make in response to that:

1) this entire post was in response to chatter about tv shows: Buffy, Lois and Clark and various others - none of which I really know much about, so I'll stick to the one I know, which brings me to -
2) House is SUCH a post-modern superhero. He charges for saving the world, but also tries to get out of saving them at all.
And, lastly,
3) I want a photo of deird1's superhero persona!!!!! How much?

Laney


(What's your superhero name? Do you have a cool costume? What about a superpower? And, most importantly, what's your cool catchphrase that you say before turning and exiting dramatically?)