I honestly don't get why they got that much flak over a few bill items. Would it have been any better for them to hide how much they paid for various parts of their show?
(So what if they paid X for lights? If they wanted _those_ lights... etc.)
back
2 comments
> I honestly don't get why they got that much flak over a few bill items
Because it discredits them. It isn't far off from when Fox News dismisses the problems of poverty with "but they have refrigerators" or when people (often around here) yet to reorient reality so that the cause of poverty is buying $5 quality-of-life improvements instead of societal economic intent.
It helps folks sleep at night.
Well... there's a difference between wanting things and being able to afford them, for starters. And... it's weird that they 'lost' money, but were able to pay themselves as well. Cut back on the lighting expenses a bit, and/or pay yourselves less, then ... bam you're profitable. But given that they got the lights anyway, they (individuals) could afford it, just not in the context of paying for things from the tour revenue.
Paying yourself... $15k (?) then complaining that you 'lost' money... just seems a bit weird.