Pride parade funded - Conservatives in a tizzy - Ablonczy demoted

[Thunderball]

Frankly, I think questions should be asked of why the Calgary Stampede Board and its Scrooge McDuck Money Tower need $2 million per year, when there's so many struggling arts, music and sports festivals/tournaments/activities in the Calgary region.

Personally, I'd rather see earmarked social money going to Gay pride parades than massive for-profit companies like the Stampede.

[@theCBE]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

So you don't have an issue with Quebec City getting more funding dollars then Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver combined?

I don't think those stats tell the whole picture... If Calgary, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Vancouver were applying for the same amout of Tourism funding as Quebec City, and were subsequently denied, then Yes, I would be pissed.

But if Quebec City is more pro-active about hosting events and actively seeks out more funding for these events then I don't really have a problem with them getting the funding.

I think you need more information to get an accuate assessment though.

[DFO]

This social conservatisim kick of Harper's is getting old. Moves like this all but point to a Liberal majority next time around. Thats too bad.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

Toronto Pride is a national event - it is the biggest Pride in Canada (I believe that its the 2nd biggest in NA) and generates tremendous intra and international tourism. $400,000 to support an event that generates a $100,000,000 annual economic benefit? C'mon...that only makes good economic sense. The most diehard conservative would know that. If you could get that return on investment, would you say no?

I'm not denying that, this isn't coming from some social conservative agenda. This comes from an agenda of why does the government need to give money to a event that generates a 100,000,000? Shouldn't that event be self supported and supported by the local business community? And the group that runs the event?

The government shouldn't have to be pouring money into events like this and the Stampeded and the other events once they get to the point that they're generating positive cash flow.

I'm all for helping these events get off of the ground and get known, but I'm not for continual support if its not required.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Actually $3,050,550 divided by $26,581,049 x 100 is 11.4764%

Oops...


I didn't have my calculator handy... but that is still pretty close. Certainly not worthy of being disappointed about.

You also have to consider that places like Quebec City, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto... have higher tourism potential than many western cities (mainly based on their proximity to large American centres and Europe), therefore it makes more sense to focus investment where the payoff is going to be better.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm not denying that, this isn't coming from some social conservative agenda. This comes from an agenda of why does the government need to give money to a event that generates a 100,000,000? Shouldn't that event be self supported and supported by the local business community? And the group that runs the event?

The government shouldn't have to be pouring money into events like this and the Stampeded and the other events once they get to the point that they're generating positive cash flow.

I'm all for helping these events get off of the ground and get known, but I'm not for continual support if its not required.

Agreed... including the Stampede point.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I wonder how many members of the gay community actually want to be attached to Bruno's definition of a gay male?

The point with Bruno is that he's constructed a character that someone who's homophobic and bigoted might imagine in their head's as 'gay' and threatened by. He's provoking a reaction through this character to expose that hatred and make the joke really on them. He did the same thing with Borat - outrageous charicature of a foreign person to point out the utter hypocracy and bigotted attitudes that exist in US culture.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm not denying that, this isn't coming from some social conservative agenda. This comes from an agenda of why does the government need to give money to a event that generates a 100,000,000? Shouldn't that event be self supported and supported by the local business community? And the group that runs the event?

The government shouldn't have to be pouring money into events like this and the Stampeded and the other events once they get to the point that they're generating positive cash flow.

I'm all for helping these events get off of the ground and get known, but I'm not for continual support if its not required.

I do see your point. If an event is going to be in the black, it seems odd that it would need funding. I could see loaning it money upfront to get it started.

On the flip side, let's say some group wanted to start a new event that in 10 or 15 years could evolve into a major money making thing, they would probably have trouble getting funding because of the risk involved.

[photon]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I do see your point. If an event is going to be in the black, it seems odd that it would need funding. I could see loaning it money upfront to get it started.

I don't think an event that generates a net positive impact on the economy necessarily will itself be in the black. The parade itself could lose money but the money spent by people coming to the city is big.

I mean other than advertising, how do you get money from a parade?

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm not denying that, this isn't coming from some social conservative agenda. This comes from an agenda of why does the government need to give money to a event that generates a 100,000,000? Shouldn't that event be self supported and supported by the local business community? And the group that runs the event?

I know (and appreciate) the fact that you are not disagreeing with Pride on moral terms instead you are disagreeing on economic support from the federal government. Even if that $400,000 did little more than have the Government of Canada logo show up at the event I think that it would be a worthwhile investment in terms of demonstrating government support for cultural development. Pride Toronto is a non-profit organization which does not use the money to line its own pockets. It spends any public or private money on an event that clearly is a boon to the local and national economy. The $400,000 was largely allocated to develop the infrastructure of the event to be more accessible to those with disabilities and to attract Kelly Rowland from Destiny's Child as entertainment. This may seem rather mundane but if only a few hundred disabled people can attend who wouldn't have been able to do so before than it will be a net gain for the economy. Not to mention people who would want to see Kelly Rowland perform (not my cup of tea though ).

[Bunk]

Being gay is a moral issue? I thought that belief died years ago sometime after the belief of interracial dating being wrong and against god's will.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Being gay is a moral issue? I thought that belief died years ago sometime after the belief of interracial dating being wrong and against god's will.

Of course it is. Everyone knows that with enough prayer you can change.... the gay thing that is.

[J pold]

I can't help but wonder how many people who are concluding that Gay pride parades are "to flamboyant" have actually been to a gay pride parade?

Actually sat and watched the entire event, and not just a 10 seconds news clip that is more than likely focused on the overly flamboyant to serve their political agenda and put the idea into viewers heads that the entire parade is as flamboyant as they portray it to be.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

The $400,000 was largely allocated ... to attract Kelly Rowland from Destiny's Child as entertainment.

Not to mention people who would want to see Kelly Rowland perform (not my cup of tea though ).

This makes it even worse. Money for Canadian tourism is going into the pocket of an American entertainer? Couldn't they at least find a Canadian to promote?

If people want to see some American entertainer perform, they can buy a concert ticket to see them.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by J pold

I can't help but wonder how many people who are concluding that Gay pride parades are "to flamboyant" have actually been to a gay pride parade?

Actually sat and watched the entire event, and not just a 10 seconds news clip that is more than likely focused on the overly flamboyant to serve their political agenda and put the idea into viewers heads that the entire parade is as flamboyant as they portray it to be.

I'd also add that pride in Toronto is a week long event that goes far beyond a parade. About the same amount of people participate in Toronto's Pride (many, many of whom are from out of city or country) as the Calgary Stampede (1.2 million).

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bunk

The point with Bruno is that he's constructed a character that someone who's homophobic and bigoted might imagine in their head's as 'gay' and threatened by. He's provoking a reaction through this character to expose that hatred and make the joke really on them. He did the same thing with Borat - outrageous charicature of a foreign person to point out the utter hypocracy and bigotted attitudes that exist in US culture.

Thats fine, but the concept that he's doing is appealing to the beliefs of the worst of a specific group, or orientation.

It would be equivalent to me running an experiment that suger causes diabetes by force feeding a person a metric ton of pure suger a day. It would to an extent prove my point, however it wouldn't really be a valid finding based on normal usage.

I go back to my original example of a person painting himself black and creating a character built around drug dealing, gangstering and hating and mistrusting whitey.

First and foremost the black community would not want to be associated with it, and it would be a racist statement.

Cohen as a straight male making a character based on a extreme caricature of a gay male is not only fairly insulting to that community, but it would almost in my mind not only be encouraging homophobia, it would also be encouraging community division and to some extent hate.

Maybe it comes from the fact that I just don't find him to be all that funny or clever.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by J pold

I can't help but wonder how many people who are concluding that Gay pride parades are "to flamboyant" have actually been to a gay pride parade?

Actually sat and watched the entire event, and not just a 10 seconds news clip that is more than likely focused on the overly flamboyant to serve their political agenda and put the idea into viewers heads that the entire parade is as flamboyant as they portray it to be.

I went to the Toronto Gay Pride Parade with my sister and a girl that I was dating a couple of years ago. It definitely wasn't for me, but I respect their right to self expression.

I just don't agree with the requirement for government funds for this to take place.

[J pold]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Of course it is. Everyone knows that with enough prayer you can change.... the gay thing that is.

Scarcasam?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Thats fine, but the concept that he's doing is appealing to the beliefs of the worst of a specific group, or orientation.

It would be equivalent to me running an experiment that suger causes diabetes by force feeding a person a metric ton of pure suger a day. It would to an extent prove my point, however it wouldn't really be a valid finding based on normal usage.

I go back to my original example of a person painting himself black and creating a character built around drug dealing, gangstering and hating and mistrusting whitey.

First and foremost the black community would not want to be associated with it, and it would be a racist statement.

Cohen as a straight male making a character based on a extreme caricature of a gay male is not only fairly insulting to that community, but it would almost in my mind not only be encouraging homophobia, it would also be encouraging community division and to some extent hate.

Maybe it comes from the fact that I just don't find him to be all that funny or clever.

I think the gay community is smart, comfortable and confident enough with itself now that it gets the point of the Bruno character, that he is not making fun of them, but those who are threatened by someone like him. There was a discussion about this on CBC radio this morning with a gay rights group leader. That was pretty much the sentiment as far as he could tell from the gay community about the movie and character.

[J pold]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I went to the Toronto Gay Pride Parade with my sister and a girl that I was dating a couple of years ago. It definitely wasn't for me, but I respect their right to self expression.

I just don't agree with the requirement for government funds for this to take place.

Fair enough, I was just pointing out that it's unfair to come to conclusions about these parades if you've never actually been to one.

On the issue of government funding I more of less agree with you.