Quote:
Originally Posted by vanisleflamesfan
Sigh...
I realize that my original post was long and boring, and I don't blame you if you didn't bother to read it, so let me sum up:
Arts funding in Canada actually has very little to do with paying individual artists to create art. That is what Harper wants you to believe in order to sell you on these cuts. Judging by how the bulk of the discussion has centred around how people don't think that government should give money to artists to create art they don't like, I would say that his work in this matter, is truly and effectively done.
|
Cut is such a funny word... what Harper did was cut the expected increases to the arts funding, not the actual budget. He also said he would cut programs that didn't work.
I agree with you though to a point. Galleries, Museums, Libraries, etc., are a public trust. Governments do have to run and maintain them to an extent.
What gets me is Gordon Pinsent and the "Hollywood North" troupe crying poor because they can't buy the expensive chardonnay for their next meet and greet. He's not crying for your sector, he's crying for his. His sector is not deserving of public funds, nor are artists. The public trusts however are deserving of support, and by keeping those institutions afloat, and making it worthwhile for the private sector (corps. and individuals) to keep it strong, the system is maintained. Hell, look at the Zoo and all the private sponsors they have. Imagine if the government improved the tax benefits for charitable donations.