Supporters or opponents, should the government continue to grant artists with taxpayers dollars?
Tuesday, March 9th, 2010 at
10:51 am
You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Supporters or opponents, should the government continue to grant artists with taxpayers dollars?”.
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
The ‘artists’ can paint office walls in Congress if they need the money. I suggest ecru for a color.
Right now our country has bigger problems than the cultural cesspool which is America. Sure every once in a while we produce someone who is truly great but now is not that the time to worry about the arts. This money needs to go towards the sciences and other more useful projects. Giving money to aspiring artists should be a philanthropic practice not one of the government, at least right now.
No the Government should not give anyone even a penny for the arts.
If people want to be an artist for a living that is their choice and the will simple have to find a way to sell their art and/or work a regular job on the side.
This idea that the Government is paying these schmucks to be "artists" is ridiculous!
.
Well, since they are NOT giving money to ALL artists, just some of them, my answer is NO.
I’m an artist, myself. They haven’t given me squat. Don’t anybody try to tell me that they give money only to artists who produce "high quality" work. We know better than that.
The last thing we need in a nation that is going broke is for the government to spend money on arts that the consumer will not buy.
no