April 19, 2014 |
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
"The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our money for unexplained projects forbids it in the disposition of the public moneys." - Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Shelton Gilliam, 1808
A government that relies completely on the "invisible hand of the market" will end up being a government that is ruled by tyrants.
Our country was founded based on Christian ideals that are universal among all major religions. It was not founded based on competitive capitalism.
We need to get our myths straight.
Art has traditionally been funded by kings, princes, noblemen, and wealthy merchants.
Art has traditionally been funded by government. No one else had the money for it.
Fund arts in the schools, when you graduate from school, then you are on your own.
With 2.8 million people in Kansas, and the state funding approximately $700,000 towards the arts, I think we can each afford the 25 cents per year for a good cause.
We need to continue to be a capitalist society that rewards those who risk it all to create jobs and wealth, not only for themselves but for others. In the process we will then have plenty of private money with which to support the Arts. I am all for the Arts, just not for government financial support.
Whatever floats your boat. . .
I support the local starving artists. I like those velvet Elvis paintings
I would venture to raise something I first heard of in the southwest part of the state when some small town was trying to update things for the community and make it a more hospitable place to live. A small, but vocal, opposition arose those of which were quickly and popularly dubbed C.A.V.E. men and women. C.A.V.E. (Citizens Against Virtually Everything.) Sometimes it just fits.
Maybe so. but the more money and land one has tends to make them a little more free and not bonded to the system to survive.
Governments thoughout history have shown their respect and appreciation for the arts.
A government that does not understand why this is important is the kind of government that probably does not respect individual freedom or expression either.
Thankfully, we still live in a country where freedom is not yet dependent upon how much money you have or how much land you own.
It is not the states money it is
my money they take and I don't need the government to tell me what art is
The question is simply absurd. The state government has no money of its own and thus cannot fund anything. The funding only comes by first confiscating the wealth of private citizens and thus it is the hapless taxpayers who fund things.
You would get completely different results to this poll if you re-phrased the question as:
Should the state income tax be higher than minimally necessary in order to give money to local arts organizations?
There is a human wealth, the depth and breadth of which we need to perpetuate and to propagate.
/ chop chop
Yes. Government is what we call the activities we do together as a society.
One of those activities should be art. Another one science. Another one business. Another is Education.
Without a balanced approach that includes all of these, our society becomes unhealthy.
While "the arts" covers a large area, the study of the arts is but one part of a well-rounded education. Research has shown that students who study the arts in school do better over all than those who do not. When looked at in this light, then certainly I believe most people would agree that the state government is responsible for funding the arts -- and the sciences, and mathematics, and ... as it is responsible for funding education.
In other words, hell yes!
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·