Music Streaming Billionaires
A billion written in numerical form looks like this: 1,000,000,000. Yes, that is nine zeros. Three songs from the modern musical canon come to mind that make reference to billionaires: Travie McCoy along with Bruno Mars claimed ten years into the new millennium that they wanted to be “billionaires so fucking bad” in their collaboration, titled none other than “Billionaire.” Jeremy Messersmith’s 2026 release Fox/Coyote opens with a song called “Billionaires” asking, with a dash of satire, in its refrain: “What if we were billionaires, everyone, everywhere, without a care, what if we were billionaires?” And Kathleen Edwards makes an analogy between a feeling and currency, prophesying that “if this feeling were a currency, I would be a billionaire” on the title track to her 2025 release, Billionaire. These three songs may suggest a connection between non-billionaire musicians wanting to be billionaires, or at least fantasizing about the prospect of this status. And it makes sense as a billion is such an abstract amount of anything, whether it be pebbles of sand on the beach, stars in the night sky, or the volatile balance of a brokerage account. Sometimes the best way to make sense of abstraction is to pen a tune about it.
It goes without saying that a billionaire can essentially purchase anything they desire: a deep sea fishing boat, a Porsche, a Leica, 98% of The Pineapple Island, and all the Baskin Robbins ice cream their hearts desire. However, one dilemma may plague the modern billionaire: the paradox of choice. Imagine being able to acquire whatever the heart may desire as you swipe or tap your no-limit credit card. Sounds too good to be true? That is likely because it may just be. This is arguably similar to what happens when we open up the portal to a music streaming service. The paradox of choice is presented by way of an empty search bar and a question asking “What do you want to play?” Streaming services grant you instant access to almost the entire oeuvre of music, more than the largest record store in all of California could even think to begin to display on their shelves.
According to one Internet search, Spotify hosts over 250 million tracks. This number is expanding by the hour, one day to certainly hit the elusive billion mark. Thus, for those that subscribe, we are well on our way to becoming music-consuming billionaires. This sentiment is nothing new and has even been sung about by Arcade Fire in their 2017 song, “Everything Now.” And their take on this paradox of choice sums it up perfectly: “Every song that I’ve heard is playing at the same time it’s absurd”. And perhaps absurd is the best adjective to describe having access to everything…now.
All this begs the question: Is music streaming a positive advancement for the consumption of music? Or is it a problem? Or is it both? I argue it is a little of both. Music streaming is beneficial because we can, in fact, access everything now as long as the servers' switches remain powered. We can listen to obscure records from the 1940s and beyond without having to spend hours scouring record stores or paying a premium for used vinyl. On the other hand, it is all a little ridiculous. Something tells me we should not have access to all of this content at the tap of a button, but then again I grew up when new music came out on Tuesdays and the anticipation for a physical release was so palpable it had us trying to outpace our best friends from the mini-van to the Hot Topic CD rack for the best selection. But this is change. I embrace all things physical and digital: vinyl pops, CD skips and the empty search bar. However, I am not sure I completely love this musical billionaire status all of the time.
