I think that Britney Spears and her family ought to look at this story carefully to avoid the same mistakes. From what I’ve heard, she’s been financially irresponsible as well.
Whatever raw deals the Jackson brothers may have had (and this is nothing unusual for the music industry), the fact remains that they all were tremendously rich at one point and had plenty of opportunites to make secure investments, develop other job skills, or simply live modestly enough to make the money last a long time. I have more sympathy for them than former Enron executives or the bankers responsible for the current subprime foreclosure meltdown, but not much.
And if I’m in Janet’s position, I would very graciously offer each needy relative $500 a month. For a maximum of three years. Good sister yes; oblivious sugar mommy, no.
Michael is getting exactly what he deserves; my only regret is that it’s years too late to do any good.
Why preclude them from seeing if some other label might be interested in releasing their music?
Have people considered the possibility that some of the information in the article is made up? The article is cited in some of the Wikipedia entries on individual Jackson family members, but it doesn’t fit with some of the other claims in the Wikipedia entries on how the various family members are doing financially. Can anyone cite something other than this article (or something that doesn’t derive its information from this article) that characterizes the Jackson family members as being in such bad financial shape?