Tax dollars supporting the NEA are a total waste, and should cease.
Tax dollars supporting _______________ are a total waste, and should cease.
We could probably go on and on there...
Why is it a total waste? A civilization is nothing without its Art.
but your response is a mere factoid that fails to distinguish between necessary spendings versus wasteful (and corrupt) expenditures.
There is NO public need, for taxpayer monies to be spent on degenerate political indulgences that are wrongly called "arts" nor are there any immediate security or prosperity purposes of such monies so spent.
They are a total waste . . . let alone being immorally and indiscrimately spent.
In fact, on this very day we belatedly learn of millions of dollars of taxpayer earnings being spent, to endorse a staged spectacle of an American President being assinated.
How does such ugliness compare with monies that should instead go to the military troops that protect our nation?
I agree but why stop there? You honestly cannot think of other such agencies that should go? :think:
What is being discussed is not a wasteful government agency which I whole heartedly agree many should be dissolved , this is government substation of what should be a private effort. Really if an artist cannot sell it or garner the funds from the private sector to produce their art, product, or service that they feel is art than it does not deserve to be funded. Either it has value and generate it's own revenue to exist or it is worthless except to the artist himself/herself, it is not for the government/people to support by force.
And one wonders how much private monetary support a proposed production depicting the killing of an American first family, would have garnered.
Only government grants, indiscriminately and too freely given in the blind name of "art", could provide such financing of wickedness.
The NEA has been financing filth for decades under the guise of art, if they can't sell it, and nobody is willing to buy it than it is worthless tripe which deserves to go the way of the dodo...
Is your problem with the specific art being produced, or the very idea?
Government support of the arts can be very problematic, since somebody gets to decide what projects get funded and which not.
Exactly, I have a problem with the government funding something that should be controlled by market forces. As I said, if you cannot sell it nor find private funding than it probably has no value. It really has no bearing on what is being produced it is the public subsidization of it that I have a problem with. I will say though that some of what is being publicly subsidized as art by the NEA is just filth, not art.