Author Topic: Government funding of the arts: For or against? (Read 4538 times)

mietla · « **Reply #180 on:** August 20, 2007, 11:17:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Charon
As another believer that "socialism is a necessary evil that must be tightly controlled"

Socialism can not be controlled. Once you accept the premise, it is just a matter of time until everything goes down the crapper.

Just like an income tax. When it was introduced it was to tax the Rockefellers, Morgans and their ilk. The maximum was suppose to be a 1%. Guess what, once you accept the premise that it is OK (although illegal) to tax the "rich" to benefit the "rest of us", it is just a matter of time until the "rest of us" is robbed to benefit those who rule.

Just think of it. Whatever money you make, there is another family like yours, driving the same cars, living in identical home, spending the same kind of money... the only difference being... no member of this family works. They stay home, enjoy YOUR lifestyle, and YOU are funding them.

That's what 50%+ in taxes mean. And don't even bother to mention the military.

Charon · « **Reply #181 on:** August 20, 2007, 12:30:52 PM »

Quote

Socialism can not be controlled. Once you accept the premise, it is just a matter of time until everything goes down the crapper.

Not to hijack the thread, but I believe while difficult to control, and largely unnecessary, there are areas where socialism is a necessary evil in small doses, with tight controls. The controls could involve a very rigid balanced budget process based upon a limited tax revenue structure and the prohibition of riders (a line item veto gives too much power to the executive branch).

Only "x" amount in the pot for the budget each year, and that being far less than we have now. Support for the mentally ill that have no surviving family when voluntary charity comes up short gets its share -- perhaps. Maintaining a credible defense gets its share. Highway and infrastructure support -- its share. The bridge to nowhere -- hard to sell that one so it doesn't happen. NEA? With a far more limited pot of revenue maybe it loses out to some child nutrition support program. But, maybe more of us have more discretionary income to support the arts with or greater take home pay. Etc.

The most important bureaucracy would become an aggressive and well funded GAO to police the other bureaucracies, many of which will be eliminated and those that remain reformed to become lean, non-political and focused on results with mandatory staffing and org chart limits. Few chiefs, more motivated Indians, smaller missions. Work on one of the models that reduces the formal power of special interests both Union and Corporate.

This would also drive more activity back to the states. State taxes would increase, but... States would then have to compete more with each other for businesses and tax-paying populations. Too onerous a tax environment and the middle and upper class and businesses move. Pays to balance, etc. Simplistic and off the cuff, with some likely issues to be addressed but somewhat along the lines of my core government philosophy.

This comes up short of what a Ron Paul would like to do, and is perhaps no more likely in the real world, but I would be happy with this compromise solution.

Charon

lazs2 · « **Reply #182 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:43:27 PM »

regardless of how you feel about socialism being something that can or can't be controlled....

It is obvious that funding for the nea can be easily controlled and as such... should be. It is obvious socialism and extortion... a small one of course but one none the less.

get rid of it and then move on to the next one that can be gone after.. all the while saying no to new socialism.

It is simply the least we can do as free men.

lazs

Sabre · « **Reply #183 on:** August 20, 2007, 03:35:53 PM »

In general, I'm against Governement funding of the arts. It's not the job of government.

Charon · « **Reply #184 on:** August 20, 2007, 03:43:55 PM »

Quote

It is obvious that funding for the nea can be easily controlled and as such... should be. It is obvious socialism and extortion... a small one of course but one none the less.

Absolutely. Art is far from dead in society, and I know plenty of artists practicing their trade without a government check. Perhaps East Angolan Tribal Dance is in danger of disappearing in the US... I guess I have a big "so what" where that is concerned. I do have more sympathy for preserving the artistic historical record, like degenerating film stock, but that is also being handled pretty well with both academic and private funded efforts.

Charon

JB88 · « **Reply #185 on:** August 20, 2007, 06:09:13 PM »

is a 1% program socialist lasz?

bustr · « **Reply #186 on:** August 20, 2007, 06:51:31 PM »

This has been one of the most facinating and well articulated discussion I've read in my time on the BBS.

1. The federal government does not belong in the art business other than it's support of National Museums as repositories of our National Heritage.

2. JB88, please post a picture of some of your most recent work or at least describe what you do. I know what Laz creates because he is willing to tell us, but, it would help in visulising your background to understand your reponses. Your dialoge always seems to reach a point where whe have to take you on faith for the strength of your position and then you end the dialoge.

I was once a working artisan with japanese sword furniture, wraping handles, creating/restoring scabbards and handles, laquering....everything except creating the sword and polishing. I made shira saya and habaki for a polisher in San Francisco. My 5 year relationship with him was that gaijin cannot properly learn to do the work he was buying from me and reselling in japan.

I have also been a welder. Worked in the home building trades. Taken part in restoring airplanes and boats. Worked for corporations as an e-mail engineer and systems and server support engineer. Preaty much as I needed I learned new skills\arts to pay the bills.

If my agent in the late 80's wasent lieing to me, my sword handel wrapping fooled japanese collectors under the name Kiku, and some of my re-wraped and restored handles wound up in the San Francisco Museum of Art collection. So what...........some people like fancy macrome. I needed to eat. I taught myself the whole skillset. I starved for a long time.

Art always survives because it is uncontrolably linked to the human condition. Art does not need to suck on the Feds big tit anymore than any other welfare program. Like sex, humans will always make art. If the art is good, just like good sex, your admirer(s) will come back for more.

JB88 · « **Reply #187 on:** August 20, 2007, 07:33:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bustr
This has been one of the most facinating and well articulated discussion I've read in my time on the BBS.

2. JB88, please post a picture of some of your most recent work or at least describe what you do. I know what Laz creates because he is willing to tell us, but, it would help in visulising your background to understand your reponses. Your dialoge always seems to reach a point where whe have to take you on faith for the strength of your position and then you end the dialoge.

i made it a point not to post my work or to bite lasz's "anything you can do i can do better" bait. this conversation isn't about me or my work.

i do post it from time to time and if you look you can probably find lots of examples of it on these boards.

if you are really interested, you can find it, or PM me and i will be happy to send you some examples of what i do.

lazs2 · « **Reply #188 on:** August 21, 2007, 09:04:40 AM »

jb is not staying on topic an is not using any form of logic.. he is simply appealing to the emotional... this should be no surprise as most "artists" live in the emotional.

I have never claimed to be an artist. I have seen people who do some of the things I do that I would calll artists tho...

My point is that I can not judge and neither can jb and neither can 120 government hacks soooo... we shouldn't.

and yes jb... 1% or 10% is socialism.. what can't you understand about that? is that simply another gray area for you? depends on what the word "is" is right?

If you extort 1% or 10% from someone who does not wish to pay and give it to someone else then it is socialism.. the redistribution of wealth. If it will make you feel better... 1% is not as painful as 10% but... it is still wrong.

My point is.. it is easier to start the cleanup of wrongs with the little wrongs like art welfare and move up... at the same time.. you establish a policy that says.... "1% is not acceptable any more than 10% is"

This is the only logical way to combat socialism... you have to start somewhere.

But... that is beside the point.. the point was... should the government take my money away from me and redistribute it to others based on what they think is art that is good for me. The answer can only be no.

lazs

JB88 · « **Reply #189 on:** August 21, 2007, 10:19:07 AM »

lasz.

sometimes when i read your posts, i think of a man who has a difficult time liking himself so he is abusive or abrasive to others...and that kinda makes me sad...but not sad enough to think that it's my problem.

on the other hand...it is disrespectful and i find that i'd just as soon dismiss whatever information that you are trying to pass than spend the time that it requires to put it through a filter. so if you actually want me to take you seriously then you might consider treating me with the respect that i (and everyone else for that matter) deserves. if that is not your desire, then by all means, continue on in the way that you have been...just dont expect me to care one iota about what you think.

anywho ...

i admire a good weld. i'm not the best, but i am proficient in stick and mig welding. i would like to learn how to tig weld someday. i know that it is a difficult thing to master.

i digress.

88

lazs2 · « **Reply #190 on:** August 21, 2007, 02:34:10 PM »

jb... if that was a joke then I got to admit... it was a good one.

You are answering my charge of not sticking to the topic and sinking to the emotional by... well...

not sticking to the topic and go off on some psycobabel emotional purge that has nothing to do with should we fund the arts or not.

How you feel about me was never in much doubt but thanks for rehashing.

now... can you try to stick to the topic?

Oh... and I never said I am a good welder.. I am mediocre at it at best... I said a neighbor was a good welder. Still... if I stick a few peices of metal together and call it art... who are you to judge? who are these 120 people being paid out of our pockets to judge?

lazs

JB88 · « **Reply #191 on:** August 21, 2007, 02:36:33 PM »

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #192 on:** August 21, 2007, 02:42:56 PM »

If we did not have government funding of the arts, much of classical music and renaissance art would not be here for us to enjoy today.

When the Medici’s funded DaVinci, they were the government of Florence. When the Pope funded Michelangelo, the Papacy was the government. When the Emperor of Austria funded Mozart, …

Each of these governments also had string attached to the funding. Disappoint the Emperor and things may turn out badly.

Government funding is okay, but public taste should be considered when doling out the funds.

lazs2 · « **Reply #193 on:** August 21, 2007, 02:45:21 PM »

holden.. perhaps it was ok then. I don't know. That has nothing to do with the nea here and now.

somehow... I think that art would have happened back then tho.

lazs

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #194 on:** August 21, 2007, 02:57:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
holden.. perhaps it was ok then. I don't know. That has nothing to do with the nea here and now.

somehow... I think that art would have happened back then tho.

lazs

Well we could still listen to the Marraige of Figaro, (that was done against the Emperor's wishes) but we wouldn't have that ceiling to look at though.