03-13-2003, 10:24 AM | #1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Should Congress be spending tax payer money to finance artists and art? If so what Justification is there to take the peoples money and to give it to National Endowment of Arts?
|
03-13-2003, 10:26 AM | #2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I voted no, because it is not the function of (or the business of)the US Federal Government to finance this kind of stuff. It is just one of many areas that Big Government has pushed itself into to justify controlling all money.
[ 03-13-2003, 10:27 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ] |
03-13-2003, 10:52 AM | #3 |
Takhisis Follower
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
|
I voted YES - Sir Humphrey made me do it [img]smile.gif[/img]
From :Yes Prime Minister Jim Hacker (answering a group of actors re funding requests) : "Well, of course we do what we can. There are many calls on the public purse: inner cities, schools, hospitals, kidney machines..." Actress one: "...tanks..." Actress two: "...rockets..." Actress three: "...H-bombs..." Jim Hacker: "Well, we can't really defend ourselves against the Russians with a performance of Henry V." Bernard Woolley: "Isn't it a bad idea to be associated with actors? I mean, their job is pretending to be what they're not and if you're seen with them, well, people might realise....." Jim Hacker: "Go on, Bernard." Bernard Woolley: "Well, I......I mean not realise, might suspect.....might think that your were....not that you were pretending, I mean entertaining....What was it you wanted to speak to Bill about?"
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD |
03-13-2003, 11:00 AM | #4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I don't suppose you could reply on topic with a serious reasoning? Its nice that you watch so much TV and all, but I was hoping for something from reality, not your entertainment venue.
|
03-13-2003, 11:12 AM | #5 | |
Takhisis Follower
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
|
Quote:
I didn't quote Sir Humphrey you will note - I quoted what I thought were a couple of more humourous quotes from that episods to add some topical levity. Thank you for your concern though and your direct forms of communication - have a nice day [img]smile.gif[/img]
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD |
|
03-13-2003, 11:16 AM | #6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
And the odds anyone here in the USA (the country of the topic) has any knowledge of that particular show is????? How about supplying something that will be understood by everyone and not just your neighbors? Please?
Edit: at your request I re-read your post...and all I can see is that your reply says...You voted Yes because someone called Sir Humphrey made you. That carries no usefull information for me...sorry. [ 03-13-2003, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ] |
03-13-2003, 11:17 AM | #7 |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
|
Yes. Of course. Beside, the money spend on the arts is peanuts - truly - compared to the other crap out there.
The arts might not be *roads* or *national defense* but they are certainly more important than 95% of the items money is spent by the government. The most important thing is that the arts are a form of history that should not be allowed to die off. And, certain art form would if not protected. It would be sad if you absolutely could not go to a symphony or a museum and the *only* form of "art" we could enjoy were those that were PROFITABLE - such as all those wonderful movies [img]graemlins/1puke.gif[/img] The Blue Man Group and Broadway cheese are cool, but I'm glad the gov't shuffles a small amount of money to keep less profitable art forms around. You personally might not give two hoots about the arts, but it is the society that benefits - the existence of art in the society is a social good. How far does your theory go MagiK? Cut school arts and music programs? That's horrible - especially since participation in school music is shown to boost student's performance levels in EVERYTHING - including simple happiness. Cut museum spending? Surely not. That's like refusing to fund the teaching of history. |
03-13-2003, 11:18 AM | #8 |
Takhisis Follower
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
|
Google dear boy - Google - it can work wonders.
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD |
03-13-2003, 11:22 AM | #9 | |
Jack Burton
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Airstrip One
Age: 40
Posts: 5,571
|
Quote:
Did you know that 'Yes, Prime Minister' was Margaret Thatcher's favourite TV programme. It makes you wonder where she found the time to watch TV with all that waging war and destroying the unions and the introduction of the Poll Tax and stuff. Of course I wouldn't normally consider the opinion of that old harridan any recommendation but on this occasion she was right. Oops - edit to say something on topic. Art good - guns bad! But I expect everyone knew I would think that! [ 03-13-2003, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: Donut ]
__________________
[img]\"http://www.wheatsheaf.freeserve.co.uk/roastspurs.gif\" alt=\" - \" /> <br />Proud member of the Axis of Upheaval<br />Official Titterer of the Laughing Hyenas<br />Josiah Bartlet - the best President the US never had.<br />The 1st D in the D & D Show |
|
03-13-2003, 11:22 AM | #10 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
So Timber, what you are saying..is that art would die unless the government subsidizes it? and yet you say the amount is peanuts....I see a conflict there.
I also fail to see how supporting some guy who sculpts religious figures out of feces or some woman paints her body and presses it against canvas need government support....can't they do those things on their own dime? I am pretty certain that feces may be easily optained at little cost and that it probably costs reletively little to paint yourself and lay on a canvas. I think art would do quite well without the "governmental peanuts". I also agree with you about massive wastage in other parts of our government...this was just the topic of the day. Edit: As for school art, we spend annually more than 100BILLION and maybe as much as 150 BILLION a year on schools. Of that amount it is estimated that up to 30BILLION is lost to waste fraud and abuse. I think that we are spending quite enough on schools, especially in light of the product we are receiving. [ 03-13-2003, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ] |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Spending too much time on the web? | Arvon | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 24 | 10-24-2004 09:13 PM |
RIGHT NOW- Blair addressing US Congress | Rokenn | General Discussion | 9 | 07-18-2003 02:54 PM |
Iraqi National Congress ? | Wutang | General Discussion | 3 | 03-26-2003 04:21 PM |
My Spending Spree | Lavindathar | Baldurs Gate & Tales of the Sword Coast | 13 | 02-11-2002 06:36 PM |
Spending the Night | Fliegender Hollander | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 8 | 06-01-2001 05:58 PM |