Dammit... I forgot about that. Open mouth, insert foot.
That's a good point, but this is not some guy whose living it is to build homes. The Edge doesn't have to do this. Also, if the community objects and even The Edge recognizes these complaints as justified, it seems there's a part of him -- the better part -- that should stop it.I really don't know any more than what I have read here of course, and I am not siding with anyone here. But I am only asking if these people complaining are living in tents, or do they live in homes that also caused some upset to the natural environment when they were built? Should someone (anyone, not just Edge) not be able to build a home on the land they own because it blocks someone's view of something (a piece of LA in this instance) Any time a new home is built, someone's view of something will be blocked, that's just life, and maybe someone will build a home later that blocks a view from Edge's house (And yes I do understand that views affect the value of property, but you can't own a view... at least I don't think so, unless I'm wrong about that!) Again I'm only addressing those points and not the other things stated here. My question is on those 2 points only. And can Edge really move a mountain?
No, but they're obviously not as rich as him, so, in proportion, it's a similar situation, right? It's the same sort of capitalist mentality that can't be satiated.i'm sorry mudfield, but the people complaining are not middle class. his so-called neighbours are a bunch of spoiled rich people. stop portraying them as some sort of wonderful commune helpless at the hands of the rich. oh boohoo they're precious archery club got evicted. oh where, oh where will they get together and snob-hob now?
As long as he isn't violating any laws and/or ordinances and gets required permits and all that jazz, he has a right to develop his property.
I'm not saying that if I was in the area and being directly affected by it that I would be happy...but that is just how it is.
Dammit... I forgot about that. Open mouth, insert foot.
That's a good point, but this is not some guy whose living it is to build homes. The Edge doesn't have to do this. Also, if the community objects and even The Edge recognizes these complaints as justified, it seems there's a part of him -- the better part -- that should stop it.
I believe The Edge is a good man, but he's gone off course. It's like really destructive hobby with him -- one that he's not very good at, if you look at the Clarence Hotel balance sheets.
No, but they're obviously not as rich as him, so, in proportion, it's a similar situation, right? It's the same sort of capitalist mentality that can't be satiated.
How about that story about The Edge's tour bus stopping in front of someone's way for a long time. U2 has become so corrupted by its wealth.
Please... if you actually read the article you could tell it was mostly hearsay from jealous and upset neighbors and not based on any real facts.I believe The Edge is a good man, but he's gone off course. It's like really destructive hobby with him --
No, but they're obviously not as rich as him, so, in proportion, it's a similar situation, right? It's the same sort of capitalist mentality that can't be satiated.
I'm not saying it's illegal, but it's clearly morally questionable. This is massive greed on his part. People have a right to peace and quiet. How about that story about The Edge's tour bus stopping in front of someone's way for a long time. U2 has become so corrupted by its wealth.
Maybe, but each of these people has one home. We're all greedy to an extent, but The Edge doesn't just want his one home, he wants to be a bloody land developer, when he's already beyond financially secure. Maybe you're right, but I don't know it just seems really sickeningly greedy to me. Thanks for discussing things, civilly, by the way.Well, why does he not have just as much right to build a home on his land here as these people did? The woman complaining about her view of the necklace thing strikes me as especially nuts.
I'd written more about the legal aspect here but edited because I saw you addressed that while I typed, with the moral aspect. I doubt these complaining people's "morals" are any better or more righteous than his, since it is their views and property that they are concerned about.
I'm not saying it's illegal, but it's clearly morally questionable. This is massive greed on his part. People have a right to peace and quiet. How about that story about The Edge's tour bus stopping in front of someone's way for a long time. U2 has become so corrupted by its wealth.
but maybe you should just ask yourselves harder questions instead of just assuming the worst of me.
Look, I want to be on The Edge's side, but when I read this article, I couldn't defend it. It just looked like he was being all passive and pretend nice, but being addicted to the ruthlessness that wealth affords people. What about that development project in Ireland that's upsetting people over there? He's made with expansionism, this guy. It's really tragic. Some people are making the thread about me, but maybe you should just ask yourselves harder questions instead of just assuming the worst of me.
Also, I'll definitely be listening to the album next week because I'm heading home to listen on my parents awesome stereo system and watch the DVD on their big TV; I wanna experience it through the film first, I think. Should be exciting.
Also, I'll definitely be listening to the album next week because I'm heading home to listen on my parents awesome stereo system and watch the DVD on their big TV; I wanna experience it through the film first, I think. Should be exciting.
Also, I'll definitely be listening to the album next week because I'm heading home to listen on my parents awesome stereo system and watch the DVD on their big TV; I wanna experience it through the film first, I think. Should be exciting.
U2 has become so corrupted by its wealth.
maybe its Evil Edge doing all this
No, but they're obviously not as rich as him, so, in proportion, it's a similar situation, right? It's the same sort of capitalist mentality that can't be satiated.
This is massive greed on his part. People have a right to peace and quiet. U2 has become so corrupted by its wealth.
How about that story about The Edge's tour bus stopping in front of someone's way for a long time.
Some people are making the thread about me, but maybe you should just ask yourselves harder questions instead of just assuming the worst of me.
Maybe, but each of these people has one home. We're all greedy to an extent, but The Edge doesn't just want his one home, he wants to be a bloody land developer, when he's already beyond financially secure. Maybe you're right, but I don't know it just seems really sickeningly greedy to me. Thanks for discussing things, civilly, by the way.
here is the online story...
U2 Guitarist has Malibu Residents on 'The Edge'
I only need to see the title of that article to know that it's the pinnacle of journalism.