Britney Spears Is A Good Mom

My last post about Britney turned out to be a smash hit, despite the fact that I have to look up how to spell her first name every time I think about her. (Not often.) That said, I’ve decided to risk it again and remind you all that you think I’m crazier than she is. I’m going to do this by demonstrating why I think she should keep custody of her kids.

This argument will draw HEAVILY from today’s article in which financial details of her and her husband are revealed. It’s boring, but feel free to read it anyway. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2792281.ece
Oh wait. Everyone read this already. Nevermind. Let’s continue.

The article was written to try and blast Britney for spending lots of money shamefully and wastefully. My concise summary of this “insightful” observation reads as follows:
“Duh.”

My expanded summary of my take on this is as follows:
“So would you, if you had that kind of money to spend.”

Of course you don’t think that now. You’re busy thinking how horrible I am for suggesting that you could be as decadent and hedonistic as Britney. But I know a lot of you, readers. I’ve seen pictures of most of you drunk off your ass. I’ve seen some of you doze off in a puddle of your own vomit. (Ah, college.) If you’re willing to get drunk off your ass, the only thing seriously stopping you from doing more hardcore substances is a lack of quality control for street drugs. That and the fact that you usually have someplace to be in the morning. You wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between rat poison and heroin. Britney has people who do that sort of thing for her, and other people who make sure she arrives where she needs to be on time. [Note: I don’t know what drugs everyone thinks Britney is doing. All I know is that I like how the word “heroin” is spelled.] [Second note: I’m pretty sure a few of you CAN tell the difference between street drugs and rat poison, and do so regularly.] Only very rare people are intrinsically productive and reserved, and it’s usually the result of some sort of childhood trauma. (“Still not clean! Must scrub harder! Still not clean! Must scrub harder!”) I’m not going to demonize Britney for not being one of these people. She’s produced a hell of a lot more in mind-altered haze than most people will in their lifetimes. I base this not off of an aesthetic evaluation of her work, but rather its impact on the GDP. It’s the only fair scale I can think of.

In summary, Britney is about as much of a hedonist as anyone else I know, excepting that she has more regular opportunities. This does not strike me as dangerous yet.

Let’s start sifting through that article I linked above. It complains that Britney gives only $500 per month to charity. That’s not a huge fraction of her income. But let me point out two things on that note:
1) She’s got me beat. My charitable contributions in 2006 were worth less than two grand and were divided between donations to the alma mater and giving away “slightly used” clothes to Goodwill instead of dumping them. She’s probably got you beat for charity too.
2) If I were Britney, I wouldn’t give a cent to any of us whiney bastards or our poor cousins. We as a planet have spent years teaching Britney that there are two types of people in this world:
--Her fans, who obviously have more money than they really needed and aren’t too worried if cynical bloggers can summarize her song lyrics as “ironically undisguised renditions of active pedophilia” for a cheap laugh and
-- Everyone else, who get mental boners reading newspaper articles like the one above.

If I saw the world as a split between two types of people like that, the only charity I’d be giving to would be called, “Dollars for Shoving Things Up the Asses of People Who Don’t Like It, and Removing Things From the Asses of People Who Do.” Again, since I think this is pretty much the name of the charity Britney is giving to, I’m not seeing any real character flaw here. Keep in mind, this blog post is probably the nicest (and still somewhat respectable) thing that will be said about Britney all day. That’s not really the sort of situation that makes you feel charitable. Contrast this with Bill Gates, who gives obscene amounts of money to people constantly. His life is spent going to work where he’s surrounded by super-genius programmers hand-picked from around the globe and going to conferences where his products are used and praised. (Even if you’re a Mac user, you should be aware that this is largely true.) If I lived a life like that, I too would be under the impression that humanity is inherently good, has unlimited potential, and is worthy of getting a kick-start from my own success.

My perspective is actually in the middle. I go through life thinking that people are inherently neither good nor evil. Instead, there are people who go through life tending to break or damage everything and everyone they encounter (the teeming hordes), and a small fraction of people who spend all their time cleaning up the mess and making new things. From my point of view, giving away used items is the perfect charitable compromise. The items have been used sensibly and responsibly, but have reached the point where they can best add the other joy to the world by being taken for granted and abused by the people who are into that sort of thing. I do the same thing with computers and computer parts, but don’t claim this on tax forms. People love computers, but most people think that there is no value in knowing how to use them. These people break them often. They should not be trusted with new ones unless they pay through the teeth for it.

Returning from that digression, let’s finally get to the point. I think Britney should keep custody of her kids. Why do I say that? Two reasons:
1) The kids have three options here. Go home with Mommy, Daddy, or strangers.
2) Mommy is better than Daddy or strangers.

Why is Mommy better? Let’s prove that she’s better than Daddy first. Referencing the above article, Britney manages to save more than half the money she earns. Stop and digest that. Ignoring how much money she spends, she has a 50% savings rate. That is some SERIOUS responsibility right there. I’m not kidding. My savings rate is about 35% and is considered 99.9th percentile. When you consider further that she’s an uber-celebrity, that more or less makes her one of the most responsible people on Earth. Compare this to Daddy. Daddy made about $500,000 last year. After “business expenses,” guess what his annualized salary comes out to be. About $7,000. That’s right. About a years worth of workstudy paychecks. Outstanding. Plus, I think everyone agrees that Daddy appears to be a huge douche. He’s not winning on the personality side of things either.

Why is Mommy better than strangers? Let’s say you were Britney’s kid. Would you like to realize on your 21st birthday that you could have had a life of carefree opulence? With a mom who has an investment strategy that will result in her owning the state of Louisina by the time she’s 45? (I’m being almost serious. It was that little tidbit that inspired me to write an article defending Britney. Her sense of humor is obviously underrated.) But instead, the newspapers decided for you that you had to grow up as “Binky Brown,” ward of the state? Mommy wins.

I am now adding Britney to the two-person list of “Unlikely Celebrities Lake Is Defending.” She and Ann Coulter will have some fascinating tea parties at the weekly get-togethers.