Amy Poehler has a new podcast called Good Hang with Amy Poehler. Of course, Amy’s “wife” Tina Fey was one of her first guests, and I can only hope that Tina will be a regular guest. There’s something magical about Tina and Amy’s friendship and their comedic energy when they’re together. They have been dear friends for what? Almost three decades? Something like that. Well, obviously, Tina made some comments which are getting a lot of play. Tina and Amy start talking about celebrity side-hustles and how Tina doesn’t really respect rich people who dabble in money-making schemes on the side.
Tina Fey revealed she will never have a side hustle and admitted she judges fellow celebrities who do.
“I have a problem with rich people having a side hustle,” the “Mean Girls” star shared on Tuesday’s episode of the “Good Hang with Amy Poehler” podcast. “If you already have like $200 million … I judge it,” she added.
Poehler, 53, encouraged Fey, 54, to change her viewpoint, saying the latter should “learn from Gen Z” and not “judge it.”
The pals got on the topic of side hustles when the “Parks and Recreation” star complemented Fey on her “incredible hair.”
“I feel like you should have a hair campaign,” Poehler said. “[I’m] always pushing you to have a glasses line. Why do you not have a glass [line]?”
Fey started to detail why she hadn’t invested in a glasses line before Poehler interrupted, saying, “You hate money?”
“I do kind of hate money,” the “Date Night” star chimed in, explaining that she is “terrible with money.”
“No, I’m not terrible. I don’t waste money, but I don’t get excited about money,” she clarified. The “30 Rock” alum shared she only needs enough funds to feel “safe” and live.
Page Six missed one of the funniest parts, which is when Tina said that she judges side-hustles and Amy says “you mean like a podcast or something?” LMAO. The thing to understand about Tina’s perspective – and this is why Amy brings up Gen Z – is that Tina is Gen X. Gen Xers and Xennials did not grow up in “hustle culture.” That was not part of our cultural experience – when we were growing up, we were told to look down on “sellouts” who “did things for money.” There was a whole period of time when people looked down on new designer clothing and everyone prioritized vintage everything and flea-markets and Goodwills. Actors just ACTED, they didn’t have their own wine labels. Musicians didn’t have a list of sponsors. That absolutely shifted in the past twenty years, but Tina is still clinging to her Gen X belief system.
“i have a problem with rich people having a side hustle” shes literally so important to the culture pic.twitter.com/ndUCn18oBB
— m (@bigIttIeIies) March 18, 2025
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
-
- Tina Fey and Amy Poehler attend the World Premiere of “Sisters” on December 8, 2015 at the Ziegfeld Theatre iin New York, New York, USA.,Image: 527659482, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Photoshot – sales@photoshot.com London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Florida: +1 239 689 1883 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251, Model Release: no, Credit line: Robin Platzer/Twin Images/Twin Images/Avalon
-
- Tina Fey bei der Premiere des Konifilms Mean Girls: Der Girls Club im AMC Lincoln Square Theater. New York, 08.01.2024 *** Tina Fey at the premiere of the conifilm Mean Girls The Girls Club at the AMC Lincoln Square Theater New York, 08 01 2024 Foto:xB.xHinex/xFuturexImagex mean_4121,Image: 835419463, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: imago is entitled to issue a simple usage license at the time of provision. Personality and trademark rights as well as copyright laws regarding art-works shown must be observed. Commercial use at your own risk., Model Release: no, Credit line: IMAGO/Barbara Hine / Avalon
-
- NEW YORK, NY – JANUARY 10: Tina Fey pictured as the cast of Mean Girls, in partnership with Girls Inc., light the Empire State Building pink celebrating its premiere in New York City on January 10, 2024. Copyright: xmpi099x,Image: 835843170, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: imago is entitled to issue a simple usage license at the time of provision. Personality and trademark rights as well as copyright laws regarding art-works shown must be observed. Commercial use at your own risk., Model Release: no, Credit line: IMAGO/mpi099 / Avalon
-
- Tina Fey attends ‘ Mean Girls: The Musical ‘ Gala Premiere at the Savoy Theatre in London, England. UK. Wednesday 26th June 2024 -,Image: 885192771, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: NORESTRICTIONS, Model Release: no, Pictured: Mean Girls: The Musical – Gala P, Credit line: James Warren/Bang Showbiz/Avalon
-
- Tina Fey attends ‘ Mean Girls: The Musical ‘ Gala Premiere at the Savoy Theatre in London, England. UK. Wednesday 26th June 2024 -,Image: 885192815, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: NORESTRICTIONS, Model Release: no, Pictured: Mean Girls: The Musical – Gala P, Credit line: James Warren/Bang Showbiz/Avalon
-
- FLUSHING NY- SEPTEMBER 07: **NO NY NEWSPAPERS** Tina Fey is seen during the 2024 US Open womenŐs singles final Jessica Pegula Vs Aryna Sabalenka on Arthur Ashe Stadium at the USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center on September 7, 2024 in Flushing Queens. Copyright: xmpi04x,Image: 905804894, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: imago is entitled to issue a simple usage license at the time of provision. Personality and trademark rights as well as copyright laws regarding art-works shown must be observed. Commercial use at your own risk., Model Release: no, Credit line: IMAGO/mpi04/Avalon
So why does she do ads for Booking.com and Walgreens? She hates money, so let some poorer actor have those commercial deals.
👍 THAT PART!
touche
I agree tbh. People say she’s acting which is part of her job but she doesn’t need to do these commercials, she’s more than well off and I’m sure she doesn’t know much about the products she’s pushing either. I get the point she’s making but it’s a bit pot meet kettle.
I think Amy’s podcast comment clarifies this because Tina’s response was no, you do work for that. Same with commercials or ad campaigns.
I took it to mean the people that have their own perfumes, makeup lines etc etc. like did they do any work for that? Or are they slapping their name on a million things to make as much money as possible?
I’m a Xennial, and I agree with Kaiser, the hustle culture is not us. But I do kinda think if someone wants to make bank while they can, go for it.
The problem is (many) rich people have no sense of community and they just get richer and richer without contributing anything valuable, and that’s icky.
Makes sense, but doesn’t fit in with the hating money comment.
Yeah Tina expounds and explains that she’s referring to side hustles that rich people have absolutely no experience in and are just doing it for the money. She gave an example of 90s actress selling children’s medication and said why would anyone trust an actress with no medical background to recommend meds for her kids and honestly she has a point.
Doing a commercial, podcast, tv show etc is work. Pushing designer baby meds or NFT art is clearly just a money grab.
I think a lot of Hollywood doesn’t consider commercials/endorsements as side hustles. I that’s part of your acting roots. The ultimate dream is a SAG sanctioned commercial that generates passive income. I think this is more for the spirits, cosmetics, and content creator life. That takes you away from the “art”.
Mentioning SAG sanctioned commercial brings to light how it might keep their SAG union health care in effect. I’m recalling Hillary Swank took such a small salary for her Oscar winning role in Boy’s Don’t Cry that it didn’t meet the threshold for keeping her coverage in force – she found out at the pharmacy getting an Rx for an infection.
.
Also, Taraji P Henson was having a yard sale the day she got the call for her Oscar nom in Benjamin Button.
Commercials are a side hustle. If you aren’t just doing things purely for your art or self expression or whatever then I guess you are a sell out? Like. Some celebrities diversify their portfolios. By investing in multiple revenue streams. Instead of just waiting for the scripts to stop coming in or for people to get bored of them or to be in the receiving end of a hate campaign. I think it’s absolutely insane to put all your eggs in one basket esp in an industry that eats its own regularly.
Spoken like someone who has money. Or “comfortable.”
Yes – she is explicitly talking about RICH people having side hustles. Not us. And I totally get her – because rich people do not need to get richer or waste more resources than they do. (And btw doing advertisements is not a side hustle per se – even though the water gets murky when we talk about rich people not needing more money than they already have).
I kind of took this – probably wrongly – as a shot at the Sussexes.
Meghan’s show just launched and has been widely talked about and I can see Tina thinking she’s side hustling and from royalty so doesn’t need the money and is just hoarding money. I don’t know. But not many people seem to really get the financial place the Sussexes started from and the intensity of the security they need. As well as the powerful institutions that have had them in their cross hairs for almost a decade. And Harry his whole life.
I honestly don’t think this was in any way aimed at the Sussexes.
I think, the part of it, you don’t know they have 200-million $ in the bank. You read online that is what they are worth. Not every working actor / actress / singer has that kind of money cash. Also, when it comes to women, their offers are kind of limited to their age. It is smart to diversify your income sources while the iron is still hot. I don’t care about this as long as they don’t spread dangerous medical advice or something. Most of the time, they are investors in the company and allow their name and likeness to be used for promotion. How is that different to take money from the existing companies to shoot ad campaigns for them?? It isn’t like they are in the factory or lab creating the product.
Many successful actors (entertainment industry stars in general) reiterate their anxiety over their careers’ longevity. Not even just women. I recently saw Chris Hemsworth’s national geographic series about longevity (in life, not career) and health and it struck me how many times he let slip a comment about not expecting to last long as an actor. It is smart to invest their income and cash in on name recognition while it lasts.
You’re right; I don’t see a difference either. There are some, also, who use side hustles (Rachel Ray and Paul Newman, for example) to provide for charitable endeavors.
1980 baby so I’m either the last of X or a xennial? I refuse to be called a geriatric millennial so f-ck that. But anyways yeah I don’t feel like I have that hustle energy. At all. Wish I had more actually. So, I don’t have a problem with others having it.
It’s one of the reasons supermodels became ultra famous- respected actresses did not do ad campaigns.
I think it is all about how you were raised and what your comfort level with money is. Many of these actors came from very little. I would never knock anyone from trying to earn as much as they can for as long as they can. Everything is contingent upon what you are hawking and if you or your family would use it. But to knock anyone from trying to ensure their financial health speaks to arrogance to me.
I agree with her. It’s not like these celebs with these side hustles are seriously donating this money. Freaking ridiculous
Some are: Newman’s Own, Rachel Ray’s Nutrish, Beyonce’s BeyGood.
I like her less and less as the years roll on
I think her schtick act with Amy Phoeler has overstayed its welcome.
I understand her comment but would point out that she did a campaign ad for *American Express*. This is incontrovertibly money, no?
Tina also does/did commercials for Garnier Nutrisse. Tina’s problem should be with herself and her issues with racism toward Black people, Indigenous Americans and Hispanic people.
Whoa. I didn’t know about this. Details please?
I know Tina mentioned some of the 30Rock plots/side plots wouldn’t be politically correct today. The satire they were pushing can be a high-wire act that doesn’t necessarily age well.
I don’t understand what she means about rich people and side hustles. What are rich people supposed to do with their money – just sit on it, or just spend it on multiple homes and cars? Maybe they want to invest in a new venture, maybe they’ve always wanted to own a vineyard and make their own wine. The point is that rich people are exactly the ones who have enough money to afford an interesting side hustle – it’s not about getting a part-time job at Starbucks to make ends meet.
I mean, I kinda get it. I side eye tf out of rich people who don’t get educations and become DJs or something obnoxious. Contribute something to society. But in this case, the hustle just seems like…how much do you need to capitalize off society? Enough already!
I can’t believe there are people getting mad over her saying this lmao. I assume you must be filthy rich yourselves?
@Lucia I’m annoyed at her hypocrisy. Tina, much like Mindy Kaling is a Producer/showrunner. Acting isn’t what puts money in her pockets. So, unlike a lot of actors she is actual rich as opposed to earns a little more than the average person. One of her shows is a network show that was started before streaming took over. So, she continues to make passive income from that. On that note, hustle culture is a byproduct of capitalism ruining everything. Musicians used to make their money from the sales of physical albums and concerts. Well, nobody buys albums, and they take in less than half a cent per play on spotify. Actors used to make their money from residuals and endorsement deals. Now streaming has ruined the residual structure. Now, everybody has to have a million instagram followers and a side hustle or be a nepo baby. Tina is lucky that she doesn’t have to do any of that. But that is LUCK. Every time she does a commercial or a voiceover that is a side hustle. She is sounding REAL TONE DEAF right now.
@ky – yes! Thank you! And frankly in a recession – millennials have gone through one and we are entering another – the first thing to get cut are the extras. The slightly more expensive shampoo. That serum that makes your skin glow. So those contracts aren’t going to be as profitable and millennials paid attention and diversified beyond that.
She was clearly not talking about anyone who has to rely on side hustles to make a proper living, but ok lol.
My – No, I watched the podcast and she was talking about extremely rich people worth $200 million who put their name to something they have no connection to just so they can be richer still. Tina gave an example of an 80’s actress who was selling children’s medication, she said, why would I buy children’s medication from her?! She was talking about very wealthy people who have no expertise in one area trying to get more money, she was not talking about people who were just getting by financially and she was not talking about people who were doing work they are known for and good at. Not actors doing commercials, as that is still acting. People are getting annoyed without knowing the context.
I’ve noticed that recently, a whole spate of actors with George Clooney level of fame and presumed assets have joined his “hustle” by appearing in commercials of their own. This has died down, but I thought it was very curious and wondered what caused that trend.
Hustle culture is total bullshit and I wish folks would stop pushing it…..especially when they are doing well financially. Poor people hustle because they have to and in a civilized society folks wouldn’t have to hustle, need side gigs, or multiple streams of income to barely eke out a living. So yeah, it is gross when rich people do it and they don’t need the money. It’s hyper-capitalism and it’s disgusting.
THIS. It’s pure greed and I agree with Fey, I find it revolting. Nobody needs 200 million dollars anyway, let alone more.
When you look at how EXTRAVAGANTLY some of these famous folks live…yea you BETTA HUSTLE REAL HARD! Imagine the nut that Gwyneth Paltrow or Beyonce pays every single month? Hell…for Beyonce…glam could be a million a year when she’s on tour…taxes on those properties? Maintenance….LAWD! And even if you live like someone like Tracee Ross in California…who has a small but beautiful house you could tell at one time belonged to a middle-class family back in the day…The costs to live is STILL OBSCENE 😱
Clooney, Aniston, D Beckham have over 300mil in the bank yet do countless adverts and side projects. How much more money do these people need?
She’s does actually flesh out that it’s more the side hustles that they don’t work for, but rather use other peoples/ teams/ company products, slap a name on it, promote it on social media and profit from it. Of which I 100% agree with. It’s not a crime to profit off your fame and maybe some see it as a positive to a double edged sword, but also when your already a gazzilionaire, why do you need more?
I am a Tina-esque Xennial! I like money to the point that I need it for basic survival, but it doesn’t excite me. I’m not a hustler. I want just enough to be comfortable.
I kind of think of actors as the biggest side hustlers who need to side hustle.
People in the 100mil plus range aren’t doing side hustles, that’s why. They’re just using their immense wealth and social power to consolidate more of it. It’s frankly sort of insulting to call it a side hustle at that point, since the term mainly applies to people who don’t have the financial power to work a single job, which an increasingly excessive number of people in the world do just to survive. Most high level celebrities are doing it to live extravagantly.
Something like a podcast at least requires work, time investment, talent, etc. That’s more like a passion project that Poehler’s financial privilege is allowing her to explore.