I think musicalsoul latched onto my sentiments as well. Being someone who encourages anyone to do what they love, I found the tone of stoutflies' initial argument and subsequent responses to be very similar to that of many nay-sayers who, while well-intentioned, seem to want to push people away from following their dreams just because their dreams don't fit into what they consider practical, achievable life goals.
As has been pointed out, there's no real indication that Marten is pursuing the band as his new career. This could all be Jeph poking the beast that is the forum, knowing how hyperbolic and polarizing we can be. Then again, that's assuming he even cares what the forum thinks, which I get mixed ideas about (he mentions it in news posts infrequently, and visits from time to time, but also has clearly expressed his disdain for it at times).
Finally, stoutflies, I feel like your arguments are leading and deceptive at times. For example, when discussing a career path, you bring up shoveling crap for loads of cash. People assume you mean that as a career (I still think you meant it that way when you made the post). When it is rejected as a career, you then reform your argument to claim the opposition wouldn't even use it temporarily as a means to pursue a dream, and I think that is unfair to the nature of your original argument. Of course if I could quit my day job, shovel crap for a week to become a multi-millionaire, then finance my album I would do so. I most certainly would not shovel crap day in and day out for 40 years, I don't care how much it pays.
Also (so much for finally), to add support to the "would you do it if you had to pay?" argument, most small-time musicians who go out on the road, and indeed most private business ventures in general don't make money when they start out, and the business owner(s) go deep into debt on the hope that one day they'll turn it back around. Do they expect compensation for their work? Of course. Could they easily have chosen a "safer" career path that didn't require them to pay so much money to do what they love? Again, of course. But they chose the hard way. They chose to invest their own money into their dreams. It's absurd to think anyone would pay to do their day job, simply because they would be left without the means to exist, and therefore couldn't continue to do so. On principal though, if they could afford to, many people would pay to do what they love, as evidenced by things like student teaching or opening a small business. You claim to have set up your argument to see if your opponents would argue anything. I think your opponents saw the absurdity of what you were actually saying, and decided you must actually mean something else, choosing the most likely alternative and arguing that point instead.