Paul McCartney vs Mick Jagger - Lifestyle War

Besides being legendary singers of two great rock bands The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger are powerful men who know how to enjoy their wealth! But have you ever stopped to wonder about which one of them leads the most luxurious life? In this video, you will watch a close battle between Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger! So then, let's get to the fight!
✅ ↓↓Subscribe to the channel↓↓
/ @allaboutcelebrities
#lifestyle #celebrity #networth
paul mccartney,paul mccartney lifestyle,paul mccartney net worth,paul mccartney interview,paul mccartney live and let die,paul mccartney mansion,paul mccartney house tour,paul mccartney car collection,mick jagger,mick jagger lifestyle,mick jagger life story,mick jagger net worth,mick jagger interview,mick jagger house,mick jagger house tour,mick jagger house in london,mick jagger mansion,the rolling stones,The beatles,battle,all about,war,celebrities

[@ruelitocayamanda8162]

If the figures are correct, the biggest difference would be, if they both spend US$500M in one sitting, Mick would have no more money but Paul would still be as rich as Mick in the beginning, with more to spare.

[@nightflight1454]

the bigger question is why do you think they never can retire with all that money ?

[@ruelitocayamanda8162]

@@nightflight1454 Well, they get paid for doing something they enjoy. Why stop?They would probably even perform for free.

[@marurbina353]

@@ruelitocayamanda8162 Paul ha cantado de gratis con wings

[@gustavoguerra7471]

McCartney has the record Guinness number 1 that’s it is the best

[@edwardjensen6595]

Lennon would have been a billionaire had he lived. Even Paul said he was no fool with money !?

[@Alexandra_Indina]

@@edwardjensen6595 woulda coulda shoulda. And what does Lennon have to do with this video?

[@patricksmith4424]

I think in terms of a flamboyant lifestyle, Jagger was always going to win. He is the supreme Rock star and for most of his life lived to the image. Paul on the other hand. traded on being the songwriter, singer, musician, the luxuries came as a by product. Paul is a very steady guy, if Linda had not passed, they would never have split up while both were alive.

[@johnreyencarnacion1042]

paul is the best singer and the richest rockband his the great singer

[@philipmullins5185]

I think Mick Jagger is an ideal candidate for a face lift , At present , he looks tired and worn out , because he is slim and has good bone structure , a face lift would give him a much better look but I don't think he has the type of personality that would consider such a procedure .

[@joemarquez4721]

Number 1 songs = Paul. More instruments = Paul. Vocal range = Paul. Who was a Beatle= Paul. Just saying...

[@SargonofQueens]

Paul is a small time ballad pop song maker. Jagger is a rocker. No comparison

[@Alexandra_Indina]

@@SargonofQueens and what legendary song was written by that super rocker Mick?🤣

[@SargonofQueens]

@@Alexandra_Indina Too many to count. They are ageless and still covered by numerous rockers. Unlike the Beatles, nobody wants to listen to old pop love songs.

[@SargonofQueens]

@@Alexandra_Indina And how long did the Beatles last? Not even ten years.

[@harrylazard805]

I would say that would be pretty representitive to their contributions to pop music. We probably would have never heard of Mick Jagger without the help and influence of the Beatles....

[@fitzcaraldozito]

So untrue what you say. Mick Jagger, it's 60 years at the top, maybe some influences from the Beatles at the beginning but sorry from 1968 album Beggar banquet, Stones have nothing to do with Beatles... They just are the greatest Rock and roll band in the world, doing the biggest tours. Paul McCartney, it's 7 years, a bunch of songs, and after this, only one notable success, a song with Jackson "Say say say"... Anyway, I can guarantee you after they die (I hope the later possible for the both), the one the world will remember as the biggest phenomenon in Music industry ever will be Mick Jagger.

[@harrylazard805]

@@fitzcaraldozito Keith Richards said, "it was John Lennon and the Beatles who kicked the door open for the rest of us"....

[@fitzcaraldozito]

@@harrylazard805 Yes maybe they kicked a door opened in the early 60s, I don't contest they had an influence on the Stones at their beginnings (on album Satanic majesties it looks obvious), as I told in my first comment. But stating the Rolling stones have built their whole career on Beatles legacy is, to say the least, rather pretentious and delirious... Stones have made their own way, becoming the biggest Rock band ever, and staying always at the top of the game during 60 (yes 60!..) years, contrary to Beatles. Their performance is just unreal, nobody can beat them...

[@Shuvra161]

​@@fitzcaraldozito led zeppelin, pink floyd , queen , bee gees ,abba . Stones are not even in the top 5

[@juliefrance9719]

!Totally! Wrong..Learn More about Rolling'Stones'Taste for The Greatests Bluesmen $ Compositors..Please!🎸🎙🎶I Know Them,..Very Closely...😉👅

[@azeiras]

Nobody noticed how great their hair still at their age..

[@janschoice3855]

Who are the Rolling Stones anyway? How many people where in this band? Of course the Beatles had more influence in 8 years than the Rolling Stones did in 60 years! There was also much more musical talent in the Beatles than in the Rolling Stones! I love both there music!

[@fitzcaraldozito]

"Who are the Rolling stones anyway? ".. What a strange question.. Maybe we can say simply the biggest Rock and roll Band ever. And the absolute recordmen in live industry (2.5 Billon$ of tour earnings since 1989, without counting inflation..) 60 years at the top, no one else has accomplished a such performance. They are beyond legends.

[@janschoice3855]

@@fitzcaraldozito Yes they are really great and I love a lot of there songs! But They are not at the top for 60 years!! They don't make any new music of any significants for a long time! And why do I ask who are the Rolling Stones any way! Van you tell me the names of the original Rolling Stones and all the people who have played in the Rolling Stones in all the years?

[@fitzcaraldozito]

@@janschoice3855 62-69 : Mick, Keith, Charlie, Bill and Brian 69-74 : the same except Brian replaced with Mick Taylor 74-93 : the same except Mick Taylor replaced with Ron Wood 93-2021 : the same without Bill (That's to say Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ron) 2021-??? : the same without the regretted Charlie. So they are 3 now, Mick Keith and Ron. The day Mick or Keith will pass away, there won't be Rolling Stones any more. That's it!

[@janschoice3855]

@@fitzcaraldozito Well as I see it there are only two original Rolling Stones left! Mig Jagger and Keith Richards. But they stil call it the Rolling Stones? They maybe can hold on for some 20 years and still call it the Rolling Stones! I think they stopped making any significant music long ago! But they can perform live and play there old music. And I love there old music! The really oldest rock and roll band that played in the same formation till the end is the Golden Earring! Not the Rolling Stones sinds Brian Jones was the leader of the band untill his dead in 1969 je was a genius! When he died the real Rolling Stones died with him!

[@fitzcaraldozito]

@@janschoice3855 I don't want to make offense to Brian. He was a talented poly intrumentist who has brought originality to the monolithic early rock of the Stones, he found their name too and surely had a major influence on what the Rolling stones are, I mean their spirit. But the Rolling stones are where they are today because the tandem Jagger/Richards. Jagger is the most brillant visionnaire in Show business industry and Richards is the Riff master.

[@cuebj]

Clicked by accident. What a load of nonsense

[@williamlittle7987]

Between the two super stars...who is the healthiest ?

[@lilian6328]

Paul the best forever!

[@mickavellian]

WTF kindda comparison was this??? Maca has more money that any country in Latin America. I read he was gonna buy CUBA CHEAp

[@lesleyjane7785]

Yeah, Paul wins. We're even considering this nonsense?

[@evipladra5340]

MICK Jagger ‼️ best Frontmann forever and ever 🤟🤘👍🤟🤘👍

[@eileenstevens3026]

Hey love u both now get putting your money where it is needed! Earthquake!!!

[@Alexandra_Indina]

Guys. The Beatles sold over 1 billion copies of albums at 1983, and then Billbord along with NME just stoped counting bc it just had no sense at this point. What 6 golden disks and 100 millions, are you joking?!

[@davidoetting1551]

The Stones are still together and performing, minus Charlie. That gives Jagger a strong platform. That said, I think Sir Paul is the superior musician. The rest is drivel.

[@Alexandra_Indina]

RS are still.. performing... the old songs...no solo numbers... no solo album in the last 20 years... RS is a joke.

[@agitatedmongoose]

not your thing but not a joke. With 122 very recognizable singles that people love, 10 back to back super successful albums between 68-81 with some of the best album tracks ever recorded (no not just the singles, mainly the album tracks). Not to mention a way more popular and bigger album this year than Paul's last album. And no doubt it will be a way bigger tour than Paul's last year's tour. No one ever beats their touring success. And Mick's voice sounds like it's 29 on their last album Hackney Diiamonds with no tinkering (well other than the normal studio quality assurances). While Paul's voice is so weak now he should really give up doing huge venues. It doesn't do his voice any favors. He'd be much suited to smaller venues now to have more control over it.

[@DanielFranco-nt9ze]

I need your help M jagger and Sir Paul McCartney

[@philipdru9290]

Mick has always stated that these list are never accurate.

[@1953streeky]

Woooo! I wonder which of them can spend 10p quicker and which of them can drive multiple motors at the same time or inhabit multiple houses at the same time or have more of a beano than the other or some thirsty common grafter in the pub at the end of the day?

[@douglasscovil3447]

a rolls royce in excellent condition costs $65K? i don't think so. mick jagger is handsome? i don't think so. Linda was paul mccartney's second wife? i don't think so.

[@user-te3jc3sl7r]

Mick was a better dancer than Paul and he was a better musician than Mick.

[@robertcooney1938]

These guys use Swiss banks. Good luck acting like you know. The Stones rake in so much from years of touring. They've probably been on tour for over two decades if you added them all up. They are still playing really good. Mick was smarter when it came to the late 60s when they actually took ownership of their songs.

[@christinegarrett9638]

It's obscene billion

[@marshallhood9220]

Dang Jagger got a pantry in the kitchen, he ballin'! Suck on that Macca!

[@jessicarohmu]

Musik: Unentschieden, mag beide Bands. Wobei es ja nur noch die Rolling Stones als Band gibt. Die Frage die mich persönlich interessieren würde: You need a house sitter? I need job

[@timothyrahn350]

Off the gutter role!!!

[@sungjungro5444]

Why do you even have to compare? There is no point!

[@edwardjensen6595]

Who cares ! They both have more than they need !!?

[@jerzysedziak9699]

Where is Paul McCartney in this film? I see only William Shepherd.

[@fitzcaraldozito]

Mick Jagger is THE phenomenon. 60 years at the top. Period. McCartney it's 8 years in a very successful band from the sixties, and then, a has been for 53 years (except one success with Jackson "Say say say") Money doesn't really matter at this level, they both are extremely rich, and can obtain all they want. The fact is Mick Jagger is the real phenomenon.

[@evipladra5340]

Yes MICK Jagger best 🤘🤟🤘🤟

[@Gabriel_707]

Sadly for you no. McCartney is a multi talented singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist, producer and multimedia artist, the other one is a singer-songwriter and frontman of a band. There is not actually no comparison beetween the 2 in terms of talent, versatility, artistic longevity etc... McCartney is one of a kind, a phenomenon, Jagger is more of a normie, a great normie. That is not debatable, then anyone can have their taste.

[@fitzcaraldozito]

@@Gabriel_707 Good joke :) You talk absolutely nonsense (Jagger is also a poly-instrumentalist, recognized as one of the best harmonica players in the world, and a producer too, in short...). Jagger a normie?! 😂 What you say is so absurd, you should consider a career in comedy

[@Gabriel_707]

@@fitzcaraldozito No he is not a proficient multi instrumentalist, he can't play any instrument at a serious level, he can't do albums completely alone. He never arranged or produced or written or performed instruments on other artists songs or albums. He is not prolific, he doesn't do an album of originals since almost 20 years. He never reinvented himself in completely new genres. He was never successful on his own, he never writes on his own etc... McCartney is much more advanced in all those things. When i say normie I mean "regular artist", not a one of a kind artist like McCartney, Prince, Todd Rundgren etc... Those are real multi talented people that the world rarely sees. This is the truth, then anyone can listen to what they want. For instance you can prefer Justin Bieber over McCartney, I don't discuss this. But it's still a fact that McCartney is the phenomenon over the two.

[@fitzcaraldozito]

@@Gabriel_707 Just thought of one thing: No one on earth has racked up more live audiences than Mick Jagger, literally. Maybe because he's the best frontman ever... It's true that he didn't have a great solo success... Nor did Paul McCartney (John Lennon, on the other hand, had real success outside of the Beatles, I recognize it). In short, Jagger is a performer. He's an athlete. I think objectively that if you take a poll in the street, people will tell you that the big phenomenon is Mick Jagger, not McCartney. But you know what, at worst I don't care, they're probably both in their castles, while we are bickering over cherry stems... So I wish you a good continuation

[@michaelparks6120]

Paul would lose in a Don Knotts look-alike contest.