It's easy to think and say I'm glad to see corporations using their power to fight voter suppression laws. Those laws are a part of deep seated racism is parts of this country. They are wrong and something has to be done about it.
And yet, a part of me is very worried about how these laws are being fought. Yes, I said I was glad corporations are against voter suppression laws. But when did I ever think corporations were about progressive values? I've always believed they are about making money. And when did I want corporations to persuade people to think a certain way? That's right: never. And what will the result of an embargo (wrong word- what is it when you penalize a person or persons by removing opportunity for revenue or income?) ... anyway, what is the end result of that kind of action? Aren't those actions seen as acts of aggression? Isn't that what we've always done to other countries? And don't we usually end up at war with those other countries?
And how do people respond to that kind of aggression? Do they say, "Oh, you're right, we're sorry. We won't be racists any more." Sure, that would be great. But what is more likely to happen? I dread to think it. Things are going to get dicey. This is not going to turn out well.
That's what is going through my head right now. But please, don't jump on me and say "Whose side are you on?" I loathe racism and prejudice. I support justice. But I have also witnessed what happens in a conservative part of the country (like my present county), and I'm wondering what kind of reprisal is going to hit close to home. It's scary and it's dangerous. Is there no other way? I'm seeing a bad moon on the rise. For fuck's sake, tell me I'm wrong.
its more likely than not these corps understand their future earnings are going to come from the folks being affected most by these self-serving gop laws and as such are coming out against such policies.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
Ironically, this is happening because politicians in the minority are trying to make it harder for people to vote, and also easier to overrule / usurp the will of that voting public.
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,320
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
Interesting perspective. I'm not familiar with that story. How did they influence Carolina laws?
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
Interesting perspective. I'm not familiar with that story. How did they influence Carolina laws?
Didn’t they cancel a concert in NC to protest anti-lgbtq. If I’m not mistaken if was over bathrooms. Yes, we are so 1st world we protest bathroom usage....lol
Not sure if the legislation was halted, changed or just went ahead and become law...
Give Peas A Chance…
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,320
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
Interesting perspective. I'm not familiar with that story. How did they influence Carolina laws?
Didn’t they cancel a concert in NC to protest anti-lgbtq. If I’m not mistaken if was over bathrooms. Yes, we are so 1st world we protest bathroom usage....lol
Not sure if the legislation was halted, changed or just went ahead and become law...
Seeing how little outrage there is about the GOP going after MLB should tell us all we need to know about "cancel culture" and the role it plays in our current discourse.
Seeing how little outrage there is about the GOP going after MLB should tell us all we need to know about "cancel culture" and the role it plays in our current discourse.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
A concert ticket is a contract. Pearl Jam broke a contract at the last minute, probably causing monetary loss for thousands of their fans over an incident probably most if not all of them had nothing to do with.
Seeing how little outrage there is about the GOP going after MLB should tell us all we need to know about "cancel culture" and the role it plays in our current discourse.
the legislation goes nowhere so.....
People were worried about Bob Saget a few weeks ago.
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
A concert ticket is a contract. Pearl Jam broke a contract at the last minute, probably causing monetary loss for thousands of their fans over an incident probably most if not all of them had nothing to do with.
Just sayin
I know a girl that flew in from Ireland for that show. She met up with my friend who lives in D.C. She probably spent around $1,000 between a flight and hotel. Bummer.
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
A concert ticket is a contract. Pearl Jam broke a contract at the last minute, probably causing monetary loss for thousands of their fans over an incident probably most if not all of them had nothing to do with.
Just sayin
I know a girl that flew in from Ireland for that show. She met up with my friend who lives in D.C. She probably spent around $1,000 between a flight and hotel. Bummer.
It’s a really tough topic.
if PJ were to state “ we will never perform in a state that passes new laws restricting access to voting” it’s very difficult to get angry at them for that.
But with upward of 47 states considering new restrictive voting laws, domestic income opportunities may get thin.
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
A concert ticket is a contract. Pearl Jam broke a contract at the last minute, probably causing monetary loss for thousands of their fans over an incident probably most if not all of them had nothing to do with.
Just sayin
I know a girl that flew in from Ireland for that show. She met up with my friend who lives in D.C. She probably spent around $1,000 between a flight and hotel. Bummer.
It’s a really tough topic.
if PJ were to state “ we will never perform in a state that passes new laws restricting access to voting” it’s very difficult to get angry at them for that.
But with upward of 47 states considering new restrictive voting laws, domestic income opportunities may get thin.
I can see it now, PJ will not perform in states that restrict access to voting. A vaccine passport will be required to attend the show.
Also, please present your valid ID as well as the tickets on your smart phone to enter.
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
That is kind of my point. I could see them taking this "high ground" on states that require an ID to vote, yet none of the people they are trying to "protect" would have any chance to go to one of their shows, i.e. high cost of tickets, internet access, smart phone access, etc.
And the worst part to me is, hey, yeah, sorry about that canceled show because we decided to take a stand, but you can purchase all the merch from the show!
I'm all for people and corporations supporting what they believe in and fighting what they don't believe in. Having a side is a good thing, imo.
The one group can drink coke or sleep on their my pillows and the other group can avoid mlb or goya products.
Why have elections? If the power lies with CEO's and corporations there is no need to vote. Let the corporations dictate it.
I don't understand the connection? How does this impact your vote?
You can exercise your right to patronize a company, or not, but elections are still held
Are you thinking that because of people's loyalty to coke or my pillow that they will be made to think/vote in certain ways?
It is a simple connection. People voted for politicians in Georgia. Politicians passed laws. Some large corporation steps in to pressure politicians to change laws. Seems like said large corporation is exerting political power that liberals hated just years ago. You might say that corporations are responding to what its customers want, but Georgia had a vote and that is how politics should work. If the law passed is unconstitutional you fight it in court.
Coke or some other company threatening to leave a state or not expand in a state is no different than Coke dangling millions of dollars in front of politicians. I thought we wanted to get corporations out of politics? But it is okay because right now they are doing what the liberals want them to do.
I'm not taking any opinion on the law passed in Georgia. I just don't agree with boycotts of companies that have nothing to do with politics to somehow usurp the power of politicians voted in by the public. What is the point of a vote if a small group of people decide to start a twitter war against a public company until the company decides to pressure a state to change its laws?
pearl jam is a corporation. they exerted their influence in north carolina over laws written there. was that wrong of them to do?
A concert ticket is a contract. Pearl Jam broke a contract at the last minute, probably causing monetary loss for thousands of their fans over an incident probably most if not all of them had nothing to do with.
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
in 1995 I don't think Ed thought concert tickets prices would explode the way they did. I remember laughing at my friends for shelling out $40 Canadian for Van Hager/Alice In Chains in 1991. I refused.
how absurd would that price be now.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
in 1995 I don't think Ed thought concert tickets prices would explode the way they did. I remember laughing at my friends for shelling out $40 Canadian for Van Hager/Alice In Chains in 1991. I refused.
how absurd would that price be now.
I'm speaking more on the necessity to have a smartphone than ticket prices. In context on the interview, his 1995 quote was about inclusion/exclusion of people that want to see the show. Most of us take our smartphones for granted, while many others could never afford one.
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
in 1995 I don't think Ed thought concert tickets prices would explode the way they did. I remember laughing at my friends for shelling out $40 Canadian for Van Hager/Alice In Chains in 1991. I refused.
how absurd would that price be now.
I'm speaking more on the necessity to have a smartphone than ticket prices. In context on the interview, his 1995 quote was about inclusion/exclusion of people that want to see the show. Most of us take our smartphones for granted, while many others could never afford one.
isn't there an option for folks that don't have a phone? I recall before I finally entered the 21st century, looking at ticketmaster, there was an option. I don't recall what it was, but there was an option.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
in 1995 I don't think Ed thought concert tickets prices would explode the way they did. I remember laughing at my friends for shelling out $40 Canadian for Van Hager/Alice In Chains in 1991. I refused.
how absurd would that price be now.
I'm speaking more on the necessity to have a smartphone than ticket prices. In context on the interview, his 1995 quote was about inclusion/exclusion of people that want to see the show. Most of us take our smartphones for granted, while many others could never afford one.
isn't there an option for folks that don't have a phone? I recall before I finally entered the 21st century, looking at ticketmaster, there was an option. I don't recall what it was, but there was an option.
There wasn't any other option than smartphone for what would've been PJ's 2020 tour. Here's some discussion on it....
I hate the smart phone tickets. In 1995, Eddie said in Spin Magazine that he couldn’t imagine only performing to a crowd that could afford $50-$100 tickets. Now you need a $700 supercomputer to get into the show. And yes, the majority of people have them. But not everyone does.
in 1995 I don't think Ed thought concert tickets prices would explode the way they did. I remember laughing at my friends for shelling out $40 Canadian for Van Hager/Alice In Chains in 1991. I refused.
how absurd would that price be now.
I'm speaking more on the necessity to have a smartphone than ticket prices. In context on the interview, his 1995 quote was about inclusion/exclusion of people that want to see the show. Most of us take our smartphones for granted, while many others could never afford one.
isn't there an option for folks that don't have a phone? I recall before I finally entered the 21st century, looking at ticketmaster, there was an option. I don't recall what it was, but there was an option.
There wasn't any other option than smartphone for what would've been PJ's 2020 tour. Here's some discussion on it....
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
-EV 8/14/93
Ironically, this is happening because politicians in the minority are trying to make it harder for people to vote, and also easier to overrule / usurp the will of that voting public.
It's quite the predicament.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Interesting perspective. I'm not familiar with that story. How did they influence Carolina laws?
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Not sure if the legislation was halted, changed or just went ahead and become law...
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
even if I look and act really crazy.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Seeing how little outrage there is about the GOP going after MLB should tell us all we need to know about "cancel culture" and the role it plays in our current discourse.
the legislation goes nowhere so.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
if PJ were to state “ we will never perform in a state that passes new laws restricting access to voting” it’s very difficult to get angry at them for that.
But with upward of 47 states considering new restrictive voting laws, domestic income opportunities may get thin.
Also, please present your valid ID as well as the tickets on your smart phone to enter.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
And the worst part to me is, hey, yeah, sorry about that canceled show because we decided to take a stand, but you can purchase all the merch from the show!
how absurd would that price be now.
-EV 8/14/93
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
-EV 8/14/93
Accommodations for those without smartphones? — Pearl Jam Community
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
-EV 8/14/93