Questions for Michael

[Sasperella]

5 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

sorry sas ... the interview wasn't a job interview it was about the evening with Michael/emily .. I appear to have confused you again  

Oooooh! Haha, don't worry....its very easily done! 

[Crazyfool01]

Great to see the talk of introduction of the drug testing facility too ... one death is 1 too many ... i love the way Glastonbury learn from things and evolve 

[Wooderson]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

if only the Irish citizens living the UK who are eligible to vote had voted it would help vote the c**ts out.

you ARE eligible to vote in all UK elections.

Irish people in the UK overwhelmingly vote Labour.

[Hotchilidog]

Wow! This has escalated quickly!

Glastonbury Festival is a luxury item, you'll need between £300-500 to attend, depending on travel and supplies. If you can set that money aside then great, if you cannot then it is a shame but not the end of the world. Aside from a handful of people who can pay thousands to Land and Sky, Glastonbury is actually pretty equitable. Due to the way the sales are organised an inflated wallet will not increase your chances over someone who has a more modestly sized one. The only requirement being an internet connection and £50 down payment. I think that is a good thing.

 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

9 minutes ago, glastolover19 said:

I got to ask then before I comment. what to you is a rich person? Someone with a high paid job? Someone who works stupidly long hours? Someone born into money? Someone who's scrimped and saved all their lives?

Born into money.. earning 10x+ the amount of money someone else in their industry is earning despite not doing a huge amount more work.. anyone with more than one house and no mortgage on at least one of them.. anyone in a position to buy influence or capital to the detriment of poorer people.. ‘rich’ probably shouldn’t be used as a catch-all term but those are the sort of things I mean 

7 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Great to see the talk of introduction of the drug testing facility too ... one death is 1 too many ... i love the way Glastonbury learn from things and evolve 

Yes I agree. It’s one of those things where you’d have to ask what they were playing at if they didn’t bring it in next year, seeing as the trials elsewhere this year were largely successful and well-reicieved, but it’s great news all the same  

Edited October 12, 2018 by Rose-Colored Boy

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, Wooderson said:

Irish people in the UK overwhelmingly vote Labour.

I was pointing out her error in saying she couldn't vote.

[Garrett_Salas]

9 minutes ago, glastolover19 said:

Sorry but can you explain to me then why you consider them differently? To some people a ticket is cheap/expensive as is a Ferrari is to some people. I know it's an extreme example but a Glastonbury ticket is expensive to me,basically a 40+ hour shift

Whether something is luxury isn't really about each individual person's ability to pay. A Ferrari is still a luxury good, even to a millionaire, and is more often than not a statement of wealth. 

Thing is to follow the logic further, if Ferrari decided to bring in a scheme where millionaires pay 5 x the price and that subsidises some Ferrari's to go to people that couldn't afford it - I'd be behind that 100% ?. 

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

Born into money or earning upwards of 10x the money someone else in thier industry is earning for doing less than upwards of 10x the work.. anyone with more than one house and no mortgage on them.. anyone in a position to buy influence or capital to the detriment of poorer people.. ‘rich’ probably shouldn’t be used as a catch-all term but those are the sort of things I mean 

Yes I agree. It’s one of those things where you’d have to ask what they were playing at if they didn’t bring it in next year, seeing as the trials elsewhere this year were largely successful and well-reicieved, but it’s great news all the same  

its going to be a massive undertaking for them given the numbers involved they will have to massively scale up operations 

[Curlygirl]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I was pointing out her error in saying she couldn't vote.

She wasn’t living in the UK at the time. 

[Wooderson]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

I was pointing out her error in saying she couldn't vote.

Our franchise in your elections isnt common knowledge.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

7 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

its going to be a massive undertaking for them given the numbers involved they will have to massively scale up operations 

Of course, and as such there might well be some teething issues first time around, but I’ve no doubt they’ll be as adequately prepared as it’s possible to be 

[Crazyfool01]

I was hoping to attract a  few extra people across from Glasto chat ... but all they can currently see is a politics discussion ? which we already have at the top of page 1 dont we ?

[glastolover19]

3 minutes ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

Born into money.. earning 10x+ the amount of money someone else in their industry is earning despite not doing a huge amount more work.. anyone with more than one house and no mortgage on at least one of them.. anyone in a position to buy influence or capital to the detriment of poorer people.. ‘rich’ probably shouldn’t be used as a catch-all term but those are the sort of things I mean 

Ok and I'm only answering these base purely on my experience not what I heard or read. I understand your point that if somebody is earning 10x however to me it's only a problem if they are in that position but haven't earned that spot or are unqualified. What about the person who starts a business from scratch,work their balls off,sell all their stuff and work all hours to make it succeed. I have friends and family who started own businesses who then risked everything to make it work,are they not allowed now to pay themselves more now as a reward for their hardship?

People who have more then one property,my father has 2homes one in UK and one in France(both paid off),he worked every day in a garage(not his own) and saved and saved and saved to buy his extra house in France all while supporting a family,by no means is he rich,comfortable yeah but so should someone who worked almost 70 years. So I guess on your logic he's a horrible fat cat and ultimately I too will be a fat cat due to inheritance(touch wood a long way off) 

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, Curlygirl said:

She wasn’t living in the UK at the time. 

ah, she didn't say that, and the wording suggested that she thought she couldn't vote as a citizen of a different country.

My misunderstanding, obviously.

[iaintcool]

5 minutes ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

Of course, and as such there might well be some teething issues first time around, but I’ve no doubt they’ll be as adequately prepared as it’s possible to be 

Why about the people from overseas? Glastonbury isn’t just a UK festival, people come from all over the world just to go. Creating segregation between people and how much they earn and how much they have to pay surely goes against the Glasto ethos as well? It’s a place where everyone and everything is equal, you can spend as much or as little as you like and still have an amazing time. 

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, iaintcool said:

Why about the people from overseas? Glastonbury isn’t just a UK festival, people come from all over the world just to go. Creating segregation between people and how much they earn and how much they have to pay surely goes against the Glasto ethos as well? It’s a place where everyone and everything is equal, you can spend as much or as little as you like and still have an amazing time. 

have you quoted the wrong thing ? we were talking about a drug testing facility at Glastonbury 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

13 minutes ago, glastolover19 said:

Ok and I'm only answering these base purely on my experience not what I heard or read. I understand your point that if somebody is earning 10x however to me it's only a problem if they are in that position but haven't earned that spot or are unqualified. What about the person who starts a business from scratch,work their balls off,sell all their stuff and work all hours to make it succeed. I have friends and family who started own businesses who then risked everything to make it work,are they not allowed now to pay themselves more now as a reward for their hardship?

People who have more then one property,my father has 2homes one in UK and one in France(both paid off),he worked every day in a garage(not his own) and saved and saved and saved to buy his extra house in France all while supporting a family,by no means is he rich,comfortable yeah but so should someone who worked almost 70 years. So I guess on your logic he's a horrible fat cat and ultimately I too will be a fat cat due to inheritance(touch wood a long way off) 

Obviously there’s no blanket definition, I’m categorically not saying that anyone and everyone who fits one of those categories is necessarily a horrible bellend who has gained extreme wealth at the expense of other people. If your father has managed his finances and saved wherever possible throughout an honest working life to that extent then I’ve of course nothing against that, I hope he enjoys his retirement. On the other hand, if he was to decide that having two houses was too much now he’s gotten older, so went about selling one of those houses but - rather than, say, donating a life-changing sum to a worthy charity - he bought his way into the House of Lords with the sudden intention of making life miserable for those just trying to get by  in this day and age.. that’d be a different matter.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Rose-Colored Boy

[H.M.V]

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I was pointing out her error in saying she couldn't vote.

I didn't say I couldn't vote in elections, I was pointing out I didn't have a say in Brexit. I used to be a parish councillor so I'm well aware I can vote.  Non UK residents weren't allowed to vote in the referendum. 

[Garrett_Salas]

7 minutes ago, glastolover19 said:

Ok and I'm only answering these base purely on my experience not what I heard or read. I understand your point that if somebody is earning 10x however to me it's only a problem if they are in that position but haven't earned that spot or are unqualified. What about the person who starts a business from scratch,work their balls off,sell all their stuff and work all hours to make it succeed. I have friends and family who started own businesses who then risked everything to make it work,are they not allowed now to pay themselves more now as a reward for their hardship?

People who have more then one property,my father has 2homes one in UK and one in France(both paid off),he worked every day in a garage(not his own) and saved and saved and saved to buy his extra house in France all while supporting a family,by no means is he rich,comfortable yeah but so should someone who worked almost 70 years. So I guess on your logic he's a horrible fat cat and ultimately I too will be a fat cat due to inheritance(touch wood a long way off) 

"Won't somebody PLEASE think of the rich people"

Only kidding - maybe Rose-coloured boy is thinking differently to me. But to me, in an ideal word having people people pay based on their ability doesn't mean I want to line-up anyone earning over 40k and shoot them! 

[stuartbert two hats]

2 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

have you quoted the wrong thing ? we were talking about a drug testing facility at Glastonbury 

The post you replied to covered both, if you read your quoted text without referring back to the parent post, it seems like "Yes I agree. It’s one of those things where ..." relates directly to the previous paragraph about being born into money.  After re-re-reading the post history I can see you were only replying to the second part.  But it's bloody confusing!

So it's your fault for not removing half the text from your quoted text ?

 

[glastolover19]

16 minutes ago, Garrett_Salas said:

Whether something is luxury isn't really about each individual person's ability to pay. A Ferrari is still a luxury good, even to a millionaire, and is more often than not a statement of wealth. 

Thing is to follow the logic further, if Ferrari decided to bring in a scheme where millionaires pay 5 x the price and that subsidises some Ferrari's to go to people that couldn't afford it - I'd be behind that 100% ?. 

It's subjective though,what you consider a luxury is not necessarily what I'd call a luxury and vice versa. To me a luxury is something that you don't actually need to live in relative comfort ie Ferrari,champagne,65in tv,Glastonbury tickets. So do you classify a ticket as a necessity?

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

The post you replied to covered both, if you read your quoted text without referring back to the parent post, it seems like "Yes I agree. It’s one of those things where ..." relates directly to the previous paragraph about being born into money.  After re-re-reading the post history I can see you were only replying to the second part.  But it's bloody confusing!

So it's your fault for not removing half the text from your quoted text ?

 

ah ok apologies all ... as you were ... now back to the questions  

[Rose-Colored Boy]

2 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

ah ok apologies all ... as you were ... now back to the questions  

I’ll shut up now, point belatedly taken  

[iaintcool]

8 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

have you quoted the wrong thing ? we were talking about a drug testing facility at Glastonbury 

Yep sorry mate, I definitely did. I thought RCB was on about the ticket price segregation again. 

 

But in regards to the drug testing topic, it can only be a good thing. Here we keep getting festivals saying they can do it but the government step in and they always fail at the last hour. We had two deaths at a festival a few weeks back and the governments answer was to ban the festival. Hopefully the UK are better than Australia in this regard. 

[glastolover19]

8 minutes ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

Obviously there’s no blanket definition, I’m categorically not saying that someone who fits one of those categories is necessarily a horrible bellend who has gained extreme wealth at the expense of other people. If your father has managed his finances and saved wherever possible throughout an honest working life to that extent then I’ve of course nothing against that, I hope he enjoys his retirement. On the other hand, if he was to decide that having two houses was too much now he’s gotten older, so went about selling one of those houses but - rather than, say, donating a life-changing sum to a worthy charity - he bought his way into the House of Lords with the sudden intention of making life miserable for those just trying to get by  in this day and age.. that’d be a different matter.

Personally I think he should sell his UK home and we both go on a massive Vegas bender