chrispy posted:
First point: Merchandise is one of the last remaining revenue streams available for artists to make money. If you can't afford to buy a shirt, then don't buy one. I think it's especially ungrateful to complain about the price point though given that the rate being charged is fairly standard, it's a quality product, it's individualized down to the particular show you're attending (which makes it scarce and therefore valuable), and the artist that you're watching gave out his two albums for free.
I was not complaining about the price, just giving details... but way to stand up for Trent and his struggling bank account! Oh yeah, and I bought one, and I love it. Awesome shirt.
chrispy posted:
Second point: I agree with you in principle that it's annoying to go to a concert and hear an artist pontificate about his/her specific political viewpoints from the stage. That having been said, allowing a likeminded organization to hand out flyers at the door does not rise to the level of "accosting people" or "taking advantage of fans." Your sensitivity to viewpoints that don't conform to your own is quite frankly pathetic. An informed debate is one of the crucial ingredients for the success of a representative democracy.
First off, great job recognizing America as a representative democracy. I get so tired of hearing people say that the USA is simply a democracy. To your point though… I don’t think it was simply Trent “allowing” likeminded organization to hand out flyers. The NIN camp obviously went out of their way to make sure they were there. They were combing the merch booth trying to people to sign their petitions. It was annoying. Also, I do feel it is taking advantage of people that do not know the facts and what this could mean in the long term. Some people going to these shows might not understand anything else about health care reform other than what Trent says. “Hey Trent wants this here, these people are asking me to sign this, cool!” It just puts a bad taste in my mouth. I would feel the exact same way if it was the opposite view point.
chrispy posted:
Gratuitous pot shot: I disagree with you in substance about health care. I'd have appreciated government health care when I was unemployed last year and now that I am employed I'm amenable to supporting such an initiative with my tax dollars particularly when the alternative is leaving insurance companies "in charge" of health care. I'm not aware of any charge that would leave Trent or any person you saw at the venue "in charge." The fact that you pose your argument in those terms leads me to believe that you're either very badly informed, not very bright, or both.
Why do you have to use the government as an instrument of plunder to support your idea of what health care should be? Donate to charity or help in numerous other ways. I absolutely agree that something needs to change, but the current proposals will not create what you really are looking for anyway. We should start with things like equalizing the tax laws and enacting tort reform... then we can see where we go from there.
Finally, if you think the current push by the government for health care is not about control of others… that leads me to believe that you're either very badly informed, not very bright, or both.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2009 03:05PM by thisisit.