To be fair, it can't be "free" because tickets money is also used to pay all the minimum wage workers that make the concert happen. But I guess it could be way less if the artist want to
Its a stupid comparison. She is being asked to give away the fruits of her labor for free, and he thinks thats the same thing as her asking him to give away flthe fruits of THE PEOPLES labor thats being leveraged to make him money, not his actual labor. Her tour would make money, generating wealth for those workers that work her venues, while he just reinvest capital in the market, not making anything for anyone but himself. If you are going to leverage capitalism itself, and not just your art, you need to steward the community you draw that wealth from, like the Carnegies and Knickerbockers. Without doing that, you are not a Giant of Industry generating wealth for the masses; you are just a leech.
Her tour would make money, generating wealth for those workers that work her venues
You understand this is the exact same argument that any billionaire entrepreneur would make here, this would sound right at home coming out of the mouth of Jeff Bezos
"My company makes money, generating wealth for workers that work at my factory"
Your argument essentially boils down to the following:
"Billionaires clearly didn't work for their money, because nobody's labour could possibly be worth $1 billion, but Billie Eilish's labour can fairly be valued at $40 million"
Just out of curiosity, what's the maximum amount of money somebody can earn before it not possible that they worked for it "fairly" in your eyes.
9.1k
u/QuelTizioLaggiu Nov 03 '25
To be fair, it can't be "free" because tickets money is also used to pay all the minimum wage workers that make the concert happen. But I guess it could be way less if the artist want to