Even though Sir Mick Jagger is one of the most well-known rock stars in the world and has amassed enormous money, he has recently seemed to imply that he will not be transferring his enormous wealth to his offspring.
Since the Rolling Stones’ 1962 London formation, the 80-year-old leader has been a part of the music industry.
The group has since put out 122 singles, 31 studio albums, and 77 music videos. After all of this, the group has sold more than 200 million records worldwide and has been named by Billboard as the second-greatest musician of all time (after The Beatles).
They’ve been together for an incredible 61 years, making them one of the longest-running musical ensembles ever!
Thus, it should come as no surprise that the band members have made a lot of money. Jagger too.
https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?gdpr=0&client=ca-pub-3764810839868565&output=html&h=183&slotname=8851483697&adk=1903871839&adf=697431615&pi=t.ma~as.8851483697&w=730&abgtt=6&fwrn=4&lmt=1725612854&rafmt=11&format=730×183&url=https%3A%2F%2Favokaddo.com%2F2024%2F07%2F30%2Fthe-reason-why-mick-jaggers-children-wont-get-a-cent-of-his-multimillion-dollar-fortune%2F%3Ffbclid%3DIwY2xjawFHmlFleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSKne0LIDVDgFE2-uJDQtASsLmwKm_mb13kzVsyim448QTJw_30QixHEZQ_aem_GDrKF0Xw9PHg0YphUow7Zg&wgl=1&uach=WyJXaW5kb3dzIiwiMTUuMC4wIiwieDg2IiwiIiwiMTEyLjAuNTE5Ny4xMTUiLG51bGwsMCxudWxsLCI2NCIsW1siTm90L0EpQnJhbmQiLCI4LjAuMC4wIl0sWyJDaHJvbWl1bSIsIjEyNi4wLjY0NzguMjI2Il0sWyJPcGVyYSBHWCIsIjExMi4wLjUxOTcuMTE1Il1dLDBd&dt=1725610755188&bpp=2&bdt=1466&idt=240&shv=r20240904&mjsv=m202409030101&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3Dcf59a1ce51a438cf%3AT%3D1723566560%3ART%3D1725612756%3AS%3DALNI_MYJaJOB3bsPSunIOMN7MD4c8CDm-Q&eo_id_str=ID%3D0cc428cd87fc972c%3AT%3D1723566560%3ART%3D1725612756%3AS%3DAA-AfjYewfrC42NEkEIcSuBseT-j&prev_fmts=0x0%2C1100x280%2C1645x844%2C730x183&nras=2&correlator=3473351166744&frm=20&pv=1&rplot=4&u_tz=420&u_his=1&u_h=864&u_w=1536&u_ah=864&u_aw=1536&u_cd=24&u_sd=1.125&dmc=8&adx=273&ady=2423&biw=1645&bih=844&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=44759875%2C44759926%2C44759842%2C31086638%2C44795921%2C95338229%2C95341664%2C95335245%2C31086139%2C95340845&oid=2&pvsid=2770613619772024&tmod=1794199693&uas=0&nvt=1&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fl.facebook.com%2F&fc=1920&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C1536%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C1661%2C844&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7CopeEbr%7C&abl=CS&pfx=0&fu=128&bc=31&bz=0&psd=W251bGwsbnVsbCxudWxsLDNd&nt=1&ifi=4&uci=a!4&btvi=2&fsb=1&dtd=M
But as he recently stated in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, that doesn’t imply his kids will automatically become wealthy.
https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?gdpr=0&client=ca-pub-3764810839868565&output=html&h=183&slotname=3197500636&adk=2551685252&adf=1889491991&pi=t.ma~as.3197500636&w=730&abgtt=6&fwrn=4&lmt=1725612854&rafmt=11&format=730×183&url=https%3A%2F%2Favokaddo.com%2F2024%2F07%2F30%2Fthe-reason-why-mick-jaggers-children-wont-get-a-cent-of-his-multimillion-dollar-fortune%2F%3Ffbclid%3DIwY2xjawFHmlFleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSKne0LIDVDgFE2-uJDQtASsLmwKm_mb13kzVsyim448QTJw_30QixHEZQ_aem_GDrKF0Xw9PHg0YphUow7Zg&wgl=1&uach=WyJXaW5kb3dzIiwiMTUuMC4wIiwieDg2IiwiIiwiMTEyLjAuNTE5Ny4xMTUiLG51bGwsMCxudWxsLCI2NCIsW1siTm90L0EpQnJhbmQiLCI4LjAuMC4wIl0sWyJDaHJvbWl1bSIsIjEyNi4wLjY0NzguMjI2Il0sWyJPcGVyYSBHWCIsIjExMi4wLjUxOTcuMTE1Il1dLDBd&dt=1725610755190&bpp=1&bdt=1468&idt=275&shv=r20240904&mjsv=m202409030101&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&cookie=ID%3Dcf59a1ce51a438cf%3AT%3D1723566560%3ART%3D1725612756%3AS%3DALNI_MYJaJOB3bsPSunIOMN7MD4c8CDm-Q&eo_id_str=ID%3D0cc428cd87fc972c%3AT%3D1723566560%3ART%3D1725612756%3AS%3DAA-AfjYewfrC42NEkEIcSuBseT-j&prev_fmts=0x0%2C1100x280%2C1645x844%2C730x183%2C730x183&nras=2&correlator=3473351166744&frm=20&pv=1&rplot=4&u_tz=420&u_his=1&u_h=864&u_w=1536&u_ah=864&u_aw=1536&u_cd=24&u_sd=1.125&dmc=8&adx=273&ady=2711&biw=1645&bih=844&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=44759875%2C44759926%2C44759842%2C31086638%2C44795921%2C95338229%2C95341664%2C95335245%2C31086139%2C95340845&oid=2&pvsid=2770613619772024&tmod=1794199693&uas=0&nvt=1&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fl.facebook.com%2F&fc=1920&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C1536%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C1661%2C844&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7CopeEbr%7C&abl=CS&pfx=0&fu=128&bc=31&bz=0&psd=W251bGwsbnVsbCxudWxsLDNd&nt=1&ifi=5&uci=a!5&btvi=3&fsb=1&dtd=M
The father-of-eight informed the publication that, contrary to recent trends among well-known musicians, he currently has no plans to sell the band’s post-1971 catalog. This procedure essentially involves a musician selling the copyright to song recordings, or both, depending on the terms of the agreement.
Performers that have sold the rights to their music, such as Bob Dylan and Katy Perry, have made multimillion dollar deals. Bob Dylan made a whopping $300 million by selling Universal Music his whole discography, and it has been alleged that Dolly Parton wants to follow suit.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Jagger stated that he would not be giving his children any money from The Rolling Stones’ music catalog sale. “The kids can live comfortably without $500 million. Come on, he urged.
However, if a deal is struck, Jagger would rather see the funds donated to a worthy cause. You might make a difference in the world, he said.
The singer of “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” is married to five different women and has eight children total, ages six to fifty-two. Born in 1970 to Jagger and his then-partner Marsha Hunt, the oldest is 52-year-old Karis.
During Jagger’s relationship with Bianca Jagger, to whom he was married from 1971 until 1978, another daughter, 51-year-old Jade, was born.
Actress Jerry Hall, who dated Jagger from 1977 to 1999, was the girlfriend of the musician. Together, the two had four children: Elizabeth, 39, and Georgia May, 31, as well as James, 38, and Gabriel, 25.
Lucas, 24, is Jagger’s eighth child and was born during his relationship with model Luciana Gimenez Morad. Then, in 2016, Jagger’s current partner Melanie Hamrick, a former ballerina and choreographer, gave birth to Deveraux, his youngest child, who is six years old.
Oh my god. That’s a sizable family, so there are plenty of individuals to divide an enormous fortune among!
Jim Caviezel Takes a Stand: Refuses to Work with Robert De Niro
Unexpectedly, Jim Caviezel, an actor, made news when he openly declared that he would never collaborate with Oscar winner Robert De Niro. Widely known for his performance as Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ,” Caviezel has called De Niro a “wretched, ungodly man.” This audacious claim has spurred a spirited discussion over the viability of personal convictions and business partnerships in Hollywood.
Devoted to Christianity and renowned for his unshakable adherence to moral values, Caviezel has been transparent about his religious beliefs. These ingrained convictions have informed his choice to keep his distance from Robert De Niro. Although Caviezel did not elaborate on their falling out, it is obvious that his decision is the result of a disagreement with his values. The actor feels that there is a difference between De Niro’s public persona and his previous actions, and he wants to work on projects that are consistent with his own moral principles.
This incident calls into question how performers manage their own convictions in the politically charged and cooperative world of Hollywood. While diversity of thought and expression has always been respected in the profession, there are increasingly more examples of actors setting boundaries based on personal principles. Caviezel’s reluctance to collaborate with De Niro is indicative of a shifting society in which people are more willing to stand by their values, even if doing so puts them in danger of losing their jobs.
The entertainment business has seen firsthand how an actor’s public remarks may help or hurt their career. Although Caviezel’s refusal to work with De Niro might win him over to supporters who share his values and respect his dedication to his convictions, it also raises questions about possible negative effects on his future partnerships and how business people view him. Some people would proceed cautiously with such public pronouncements, and it’s still unclear how this incident will affect Caviezel’s professional path.
One of the key characteristics of Caviezel’s public presence has been his strong Christian faith. He gained notoriety as an actor willing to take on parts that align with his spiritual beliefs because to his depiction of Jesus Christ in “The Passion of the Christ.” The argument with De Niro highlights the difficulties actors encounter in trying to uphold their morality in a field notorious for its complexity and moral ambiguities.
Beyond the specific performers engaged, consideration of the larger ramifications for Hollywood and the entertainment business at large is prompted by Caviezel’s refusal to collaborate with De Niro. The continuous conflict between individual convictions and the collective process of filmmaking is brought to light by this incident. There may be a change in the dynamics of the industry if more actors choose to use their platforms to voice their ideals and stand up for causes that are important to them.
The topic of how personal beliefs and professional obligations intersect in Hollywood has gained attention as a result of Jim Caviezel’s resolute refusal to work with Robert De Niro on moral reasons. The narrow line that separates personal ethics from the communal spirit that characterizes filmmaking is brought to light by this incident. The conflict between Caviezel and De Niro highlights the difficulties and complications experienced by performers who work hard to be true to their values as the entertainment business strives to negotiate these intricacies.
Leave a Reply