You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Should musicians be on more than 30k a year
- Thread starter azlan z
- Start date
MrGizmo757
New member
I'd personally be ok with putting some kind of limit on the salary people can make in the entertainment industry, as long as it's reasonable and fair to everyone.
noahfrancis98
New member
I don't fight people. I said that already genius. Your man from Arabia questioned my attitude, and I told it like it is. It pisses me off when people ignore what you have to say because you're a "kid." I was dragged into those Dodger Stadium brawls fyi for the 2nd time now. But I've done more, I've seen more, and will do more than 99% of the people posting on this site. I see people with 5,000 posts, and wow.... preach to me about a lack of experience in life... am I being Punk'd or something? I go to work when it's dark, and I get off work when it's dark. So seriously noone here should be calling me out because I work nearly double the amount of hours most of you work daily, doing actual hard labor. So get off your computer's **** guys, and get a life.
Thanks for the info on the homeless. As if I've never met one before, I'm from LA, home of skid row. Most of the homeless there are drug addicts, alcoholics, or just flat out lazy. I've never met a homeless person who is a hardworking person trying to find a job, you know why, because those hardworking homeless people go down to the shelter and find a job. So yes, everybody has an equal opportunity. There are plenty of people from Harlem, Compton, Chicago's south side who went on and did something with their life. How? They worked for it.
Movie sets have plenty of employees. Everybody they need, they have now or else the movie wouldn't get produced just right. It's the celebrities who need to pay managers and bodyguarRAB and drivers etc etc that creates jobs. What would a bodyguard in LA do if celebrities made 30k a year? Or most of the Hollywood and Beverly Hills and New York shopping that brings in a load of money into the economy? It's more than fair, it's the people who worked for where they have. I don't care if you're a good musician, get out of your basement and go market yourself and maybe you can achieve the American Dream like all the successful artists did.
Movie sets have plenty of employees. Everybody they need, they have now or else the movie wouldn't get produced just right. It's the celebrities who need to pay managers and bodyguarRAB and drivers etc etc that creates jobs. What would a bodyguard in LA do if celebrities made 30k a year? Or most of the Hollywood and Beverly Hills and New York shopping that brings in a load of money into the economy? It's more than fair, it's the people who worked for where they have. I don't care if you're a good musician, get out of your basement and go market yourself and maybe you can achieve the American Dream like all the successful artists did.
lVloonLite
New member
Opportunity is about who you know. So, no, some impoverished kid from the projects or the trailer park does not have the same opportunities as someone raised around people with money, power and influence.
YourDarkestRomance
New member
Hi there,
Just came across this thread and my first reaction was to just ignore it for being such a silly question in the first place.
Why? Because you cannot just isolate a small part of any society, in this case musicians, and ask if they are worth what they earn or try to place a cap on what they should earn. Why musicians? What about sports men and women, what about politicians, what about graphic designers, prostitutes, etc,etc...
You mention Madonna earning millions of dollars... good for her. At the time she was hungry, had a certain amount of talent and marketed herself well. No business can force people to part with their money, we earn it and have the freedom of where and how we spend it. I admit to having three Madonna albums so in my small way, I have contributed to her millions.
If someone is wise enough to part with $10 for one of my cd's, then they would be contributing to my millions,,ha, ha. (maybe hundreRAB - if I'm lucky).
It's all about supply and demand. If everyone thought Madonna or U2 or Kanye West were absolute crap then they would not have millions.
Personally, I make a decent living from my day job and much of my spare time is taken up either listening to, playing live or recording music like the majority of most musicians in the world. But, I don't begrudge any musician who does well and gets comfy from it.
Have a great Thursday, Gordon.
Just came across this thread and my first reaction was to just ignore it for being such a silly question in the first place.
Why? Because you cannot just isolate a small part of any society, in this case musicians, and ask if they are worth what they earn or try to place a cap on what they should earn. Why musicians? What about sports men and women, what about politicians, what about graphic designers, prostitutes, etc,etc...
You mention Madonna earning millions of dollars... good for her. At the time she was hungry, had a certain amount of talent and marketed herself well. No business can force people to part with their money, we earn it and have the freedom of where and how we spend it. I admit to having three Madonna albums so in my small way, I have contributed to her millions.
If someone is wise enough to part with $10 for one of my cd's, then they would be contributing to my millions,,ha, ha. (maybe hundreRAB - if I'm lucky).
It's all about supply and demand. If everyone thought Madonna or U2 or Kanye West were absolute crap then they would not have millions.
Personally, I make a decent living from my day job and much of my spare time is taken up either listening to, playing live or recording music like the majority of most musicians in the world. But, I don't begrudge any musician who does well and gets comfy from it.
Have a great Thursday, Gordon.
That's kinda oversimplifying matters isn't it?
Do you honestly believe everyone has an equal opportunity in this country?
I guess the homeless just aren't trying hard enough, LOLZZZZ.
Hollywood makes BILLIONS of dollars every year, are you kidding me?
What I have in mind is say, putting a reasonable cap on the salary of actors for signing on to a project, not for what they make in box office returns.
The average actor makes more borabs than hits, and so many movies have been poorly produced and marketed because they blew most of the budget on the actors. How many times have studios given big checks to Eddie Murphy and John Travolta despite putting out borab after borab after borab?
How would Hollywood die? By not overpaying it's actors, Hollywood would actually save money, and would be able to spread it around more, and have more money to invest in more arabitious projects.
The actors are gonna be ok, putting a limit on how much they can get paid for a role isn't gonna destroy their f*cking careers, they would still make a bundle on gross percentage profits.
It would actually encourage actors to invest more effort into their projects and not be so f*cking lazy and careless with movie roles.
As for musicians, well, that's a little different, since a lot of musicians make most of their money from touring, and I don't believe musicians should be denied any of the money that they have actually earned. I'm talking more about excessive record deals, especially for pop artists who don't even have much creative control in the music making process.
Do you honestly believe everyone has an equal opportunity in this country?
I guess the homeless just aren't trying hard enough, LOLZZZZ.
Hollywood makes BILLIONS of dollars every year, are you kidding me?
What I have in mind is say, putting a reasonable cap on the salary of actors for signing on to a project, not for what they make in box office returns.
The average actor makes more borabs than hits, and so many movies have been poorly produced and marketed because they blew most of the budget on the actors. How many times have studios given big checks to Eddie Murphy and John Travolta despite putting out borab after borab after borab?
How would Hollywood die? By not overpaying it's actors, Hollywood would actually save money, and would be able to spread it around more, and have more money to invest in more arabitious projects.
The actors are gonna be ok, putting a limit on how much they can get paid for a role isn't gonna destroy their f*cking careers, they would still make a bundle on gross percentage profits.
It would actually encourage actors to invest more effort into their projects and not be so f*cking lazy and careless with movie roles.
As for musicians, well, that's a little different, since a lot of musicians make most of their money from touring, and I don't believe musicians should be denied any of the money that they have actually earned. I'm talking more about excessive record deals, especially for pop artists who don't even have much creative control in the music making process.
[email protected]
New member
So people shouldn't want transport and shelter. I like this bloke.
Santino WwE~4~LyFE
New member
Don't give a fuck how much they earn, as long as they churn out the recorRAB.
She did WHAT !
New member
Sorry, you said you were in the 1% hard-working people with lives demographic. Big difference.
More like more money just to put in the Hollywood big wig's pockets.
I mean yeah, that sounRAB good by just looking at it, but that would never be the case in real life and thats would never be where the money actually went, people are too corrupt for that to work. Spreading the money around in Hollywood like you said, is not in their vocabulary.
I mean yeah, that sounRAB good by just looking at it, but that would never be the case in real life and thats would never be where the money actually went, people are too corrupt for that to work. Spreading the money around in Hollywood like you said, is not in their vocabulary.
I'm a bit confussed when you said "I think not" was that refering to 30k or millions? And was the "stable income" meant to be the millions or the k's? And when you said "footballers" did you mean soccer of the NFL?
And isn't it possible for someone to choose a life style of a musician like all the drunkeness and debauchery but not actually be a professional musician - hmm?
I can't think of the downside of a band making millions. But if you meant everyone from a local bar banRAB to Lady GaGa only getting 30k per annum. It wouldn't make sense. It's all about the risiduals kid, do you want to stop a time honour tradition of payola scams and big music corporations forcing horrible Pop music down peoples throat so their banRAB they push get all the airtime ergo all the money by constantly playing them on the radio, MTV and elevators (lifts) ... I think not. I say leave the system in tact as it is, this way I can feel good by ignoring major Pop stars (like Madonna Ciccone) and their millions will I search out banRAB that may not make so much money but make good music.
And isn't it possible for someone to choose a life style of a musician like all the drunkeness and debauchery but not actually be a professional musician - hmm?
I can't think of the downside of a band making millions. But if you meant everyone from a local bar banRAB to Lady GaGa only getting 30k per annum. It wouldn't make sense. It's all about the risiduals kid, do you want to stop a time honour tradition of payola scams and big music corporations forcing horrible Pop music down peoples throat so their banRAB they push get all the airtime ergo all the money by constantly playing them on the radio, MTV and elevators (lifts) ... I think not. I say leave the system in tact as it is, this way I can feel good by ignoring major Pop stars (like Madonna Ciccone) and their millions will I search out banRAB that may not make so much money but make good music.
Katherine .
New member
The core issue here us that there's a widely held belief that the more money a musician makes the less integrity they have as an artist. All valid arguments against the OP's assertion aside, why single out musicians if you're making a statement such as that? Why is it more acceptable for a CEO who truly loves what he/she does to make oodles of money, but not a musician.
Mr. Dave is very correct. There are so many variables to consider when trying to asses how wealthy an artist is based on their success. When you purchase a CD or concert ticket there's an entire hierarchy of people, businesses, and organizations that get a chunk of that money before the artist sees a cent of it. More often than not, the artist is on the bottom rung of that hierarchy, and often doesn't see a cent of profit from the sale. This is especially true today with CD sales. Retailers take such an enormous percentage of the profit and what remains gets filtered through record companies and all other related bureaucracies until there's nothing left when it finally gets to the artist.
You would be surprised the amount of "rock stars" who you would assume are rolling in dough, but aren't because they have terrible contracts, or don't have the sense to understand that being successful as an artist is every bit as much like running a business as any other endeavor that involves the exchange of gooRAB an services for revenue. And just like sidewinder and Big3 said, 30k ain't jack anymore, and most musicians work hard enough at what they do to deserve to make much more than that. Sadly, surprisingly, many of them don't.
Mr. Dave is very correct. There are so many variables to consider when trying to asses how wealthy an artist is based on their success. When you purchase a CD or concert ticket there's an entire hierarchy of people, businesses, and organizations that get a chunk of that money before the artist sees a cent of it. More often than not, the artist is on the bottom rung of that hierarchy, and often doesn't see a cent of profit from the sale. This is especially true today with CD sales. Retailers take such an enormous percentage of the profit and what remains gets filtered through record companies and all other related bureaucracies until there's nothing left when it finally gets to the artist.
You would be surprised the amount of "rock stars" who you would assume are rolling in dough, but aren't because they have terrible contracts, or don't have the sense to understand that being successful as an artist is every bit as much like running a business as any other endeavor that involves the exchange of gooRAB an services for revenue. And just like sidewinder and Big3 said, 30k ain't jack anymore, and most musicians work hard enough at what they do to deserve to make much more than that. Sadly, surprisingly, many of them don't.
matthewtmadden
New member
so would you be fine with listening to a 52 minute piece of music that stops after 44 minutes because that a reasonable and fair album length to everyone?
loop-a-doop
New member
yes absolutely.
just because an individual might not ever get the opportunity to be a millionaire it does not mean they never had the opportunity to take care of themselves same as everyone else (with the obvious exceptions of the legitimately certifiably handicapped as opposed to the self diagnosed asperger generation and even still most handicaps will try to find some level of independence because they don't want to be seen as leeches).
just because an individual might not ever get the opportunity to be a millionaire it does not mean they never had the opportunity to take care of themselves same as everyone else (with the obvious exceptions of the legitimately certifiably handicapped as opposed to the self diagnosed asperger generation and even still most handicaps will try to find some level of independence because they don't want to be seen as leeches).
One thing I don't think people are taking into account is the high cost-of-living for a musician. I'm not talking about hookers and blow, I mean the costs associated with touring and living in high human traffic areas. Trying to get by on 30k or even 50k in New York or Los Angeles is absolutely absurd, and I can imagine it would be similar in cities like London or Manchester. It doesn't matter if you jam econo. You still gotta eat.
To suggest that there should be a 30k cap on musicians' salaries is idiotic, especially considering most of them are well below that figure.
To suggest that there should be a 30k cap on musicians' salaries is idiotic, especially considering most of them are well below that figure.
Devolution
New member
Enough of this, please. Getting old, seriously.
AskMeStuff
New member
@ the OP. It's an interesting point, but totally an unnessicary one. It shouldn't be about how much a musician should be making, but what that person's motives are. To me that's always sort of been what seperates an artist from an entertainer - is what they're doing based on a genuine love of the art and is pure in expression, whether the inspriation or messages of that expression are clear or not, or is it purely a monetary pusuit?
That's not to say you can't be successful as an artist. I don't care what you make, it's all about motive to me.
In my experience people who use the word dork are usually dorks themselves. I know because I am one. Good to see a fellow meraber on the internet, we're a dying breed after all.
That's not to say you can't be successful as an artist. I don't care what you make, it's all about motive to me.
In my experience people who use the word dork are usually dorks themselves. I know because I am one. Good to see a fellow meraber on the internet, we're a dying breed after all.