Michael Jackson's Funeral - CA Taxpayers Footing the Bill?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by joro, Jul 3, 2009.

  1. joro macrumors 68020

    joro

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    NOVA
    #1
    Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that Los Angeles - a state and city which has huge budget deficits – is essentially paying for the funeral of Michael Jackson at the Staples Center? I was just watching the press conference on MSBNC and it appears that they will be covering the cost of the both security and non-security functions and even though they are “accepting private donations” they said the Jackson family has said they are unwilling to pay for the services. Bury his ass in a private ceremony and forget about this stupid tribute unless someone wants to foot the bill which with as much as the AEG is promoting this tribute they should be paying the costs.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...pick-up-police-costs-for-jackson-service.html
     
  2. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #2
    You would think that in exchange for exclusive TV rights, MTV would pay the bill.

    But this is absurd. My aunts are both employed by the city...
     
  3. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #3
    If I was the city I would say fine we will provided support but you have to pay for it. The fact that the Jackson family won't flip for the bill is ridiculous.
     
  4. joro thread starter macrumors 68020

    joro

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    NOVA
    #4
    I think when I die I am going to tell the city I want to use their convention center, have 19,000 + people in attendance, and not pay a dime. Think that will go over well? :rolleyes:
     
  5. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #5
    I don't understand why they could not just charge. I mean I agree that it's a funeral, but iThink the citizen's of LA would understand that the solution is absurd. I mean the Staples Center is not the most reverend of places to have a funeral - and we all know it's going to be a circus either way.
     
  6. SilentPanda Moderator emeritus

    SilentPanda

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Bamboo Forest
    #6
    I wonder if the city of LA believes it will bring in enough additional tourism money to offset the costs?
     
  7. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #7
    iThought that too, but the security costs will probably be massively more expensive. I mean the street vendors and what not have already been working all week. It's better money spent then the million dollars for the Lakers' parade.
     
  8. bigjnyc macrumors 601

    bigjnyc

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    #8
    Los Angeles is going to make an absurd amount of money with all the people going over there from other states and even from out of the country for this "event" and just to be in the area. Believe me there is a group of people who sit down and crunch the numbers before they make these decisions, trust me they aren't losing money you can breath easier
     
  9. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #9
    The tax revenue from the sales tax from even his worst selling tour would probably cover a dozen such funerals.
     
  10. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #10
    Perhaps afterward they could auction off discs of vacuum-dessicated Michael Jackson, if you catch that reference.
     
  11. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #11
    Bahahahahahahaha... iThink it'd be better if the Jackson family just decides to cancel it four minutes before it starts... The city of L.A. can refund all of those people who got free tickets.
     
  12. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #12
    I think it is morally disgusting that anyone thinks it's a good idea to profit off of anyone's death. No matter who it is... But then again, the morals in this country have gone to crap..
     
  13. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #13
    Yes, but it's worse that in the middle of a huge budget crisis that in exchange for laying off a couple hundred teachers we get to have half of the Lakers' championship parade (while Jerry Buss is in a Casino) and Michael Jackson's funeral.

    You had to get tickets for the thing?

    And, the Jackson family is refusing to pay. Funerals are expensive even if you dont have 30,000 people show up, why are they special and not having to foot the bill.
     
  14. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #14
    The real reason for the 5000 layoffs in the LAUSD comes to light. :eek:

    They got the Lakers' parade funded privately, they need to do the same for this.

    Amazing they could even find money for it.:rolleyes:
     
  15. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #15
    iThought it was only half funded?
     
  16. joro thread starter macrumors 68020

    joro

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    NOVA
    #16
    They were saying that AEG stands to make a gigantic profit because they have hundreds of hours of HD video from all of Jackson’s tour preparations including numerous rehearsals. So they can make millions of dollars, promote the funeral/tribute, but they can’t fork over some money to cover the cost of the whole ordeal? :rolleyes:
     
  17. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #17
  18. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #18
  19. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #19
    Right. The same for "all the money to be made" from people coming to Jackson's funeral.

    No money spent = bigger profit. I guess the city officials never looked at it that way.:rolleyes:
     
  20. joro thread starter macrumors 68020

    joro

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    NOVA
    #20
    We couldn’t expect this kind of behavior from a politician…;)
     
  21. rasmasyean macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #21
    No, this is a great opportunity for LA. They will make money from "tourism" not only on that day, but going forward as well. The logistics cost is only one time. The impact will last for much longer.

    And besides, it's their duty to bring this kind of closure to a historical figure. After all, they are "Hollywood", and have prospered from the entertainment industry as a main figurehead. I think it’s pathetic how some people say they don’t want their tax dollars go to this “event”. Because if it wasn’t for LA doing stuff like this, you “city workers” or “residents” wouldn’t have it so good over there compared to the rest of the US AND the world!

    Think about that next time you step into your "Ferrari" or just see someone stepping into one over there. Most people in the world will never ever see one in their life. It's people like MJ that pay most of your "local taxes" anyway to give you such a "beautiful city" so stuff it!
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    +1. You can make the same argument about the extensive policing in the developing world in tourist areas - its because the tourists bring in way more money than the police cost.
     
  23. BaronvdB macrumors 6502

    BaronvdB

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    #23
    i'm gonna agree with the OP....if the lakers can pay for their deal with all private funds i don't see why they couldn't pull this thing off with private funds....ps: being a great artist doesn't overshadow/erase being a child molester in my book.
     
  24. rasmasyean macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #24
    How the heck do you know that he was a child molester? The court of law didn’t find him guilty. How do you know he wasn’t taken advantage of for greed? That happens you know? Are you going to make your own judgment from snippets you hear from the media?

    It has even been documented that psychologists have “implanted memories” into patients to make money. The funniest one was about a religious virgin daughter mosleted by her pastor dad. LOL She was so “protected” by her religious upbringing that she didn’t even realize she had her hymen intact when she was grown!

    Anyway’s even if he was secretly a wacko pedophile, that still doesn’t change the fact that he impacted like a billion people making them happy with his music vs. “scarring” just a couple of stupid kids who would prolly been "molested" by some strangers on the street anyway.
     
  25. benlee macrumors 65816

    benlee

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    #25
    I'll agree that a court of law didn't find him guilty, and it is possible that he was taken advantage of. However, he admitted to laying in bed with the children, among other things. I think it is safe to assume that the evidence was against him and that was why his attorney's advised him to foot the 13 million to settle the civil suit.

    I find it crazy that people have such positive emotions for a man that was even accused of such an act. If he were any other person in the world he would have been shunned and his past achievements erased.

    I totally disagree that making a billion people happy shadows the molestation of children and you are sick to say so. Even more grotesque is your statement that these children would have been molested anyways.

    It is true that children can have memories "implanted," however, that does not make all accusations of molestation false. For every "implanted" memory there are likely thousands of real memories, revealed or never revealed. I'm sickened by the fact that you think it is OK that he molested children b/c they would "prolly" be molested anyways. Perhaps you should edit what you said if that is not what you meant. Molestation is a disgusting crime, and for you to make it a no big deal and blame the children or psychologists and let free the molester because he is a pop star is revolting.
     

Share This Page