6 ms·

For every dollar I give to Uncle Sam, 12 cents goes to military defense contractors like Raytheon. 0.004 cents go to the National Endowment for Art. I know whi

by drekk 5y ago

For every dollar I give to Uncle Sam, 12 cents goes to military defense contractors like Raytheon. 0.004 cents go to the National Endowment for Art. I know which of those two provides more value to society, and I think it's a fucking joke how art & music are not seen as things humans do like birds making a nest, but as something to commodify and court private investment with. We completely cut art and music from most curriculums in K-12 to afford budget cuts and what did we get out of them? Did you notice the extra fraction of a fraction of a penny this year on your return? The reason private entities don't fund art is the same reason they don't fund public transit or worker pensions or guaranteed pay sick leave or... it's not profitable. I yearn for the day Americans are willing to support something regardless of how much money it makes them. Especially for a country that waxes so much poetic about its "moral majority".

bgandrew 5y ago
As a person living outside of US I appreciate those 12 cents from you much more than 0.004. US provides at least some level of global security and I don't want this role to be taken by any other country. As for art, I always can look for other options.
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  I would rather your own country pay for your own defense (and join NATO for a boost) but if the USA has to be a hegemony rather than Russia or China, I can see your point.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  We have enough money to do both! I like that the US military is a military superpower. And I like finding art (and healthcare, and a bunch of other things). If we stopped giving uber rich people unearned tax breaks, we could afford to do them trivially.
- illusivesaint 5y ago
  What global security? The military has done more harm than good and the reason no one fights back is because of how mighty it is and the IMF. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq, did it leave it better off? Or its influence in Latin America. How's it's going in Ukraine, other than selling weapons? You don't want the US to "protect" you.
4ggr0 5y ago
It seems like a lot of Americans are brainwashed into thinking that "public transit or worker pensions or guaranteed pay sick leave or..." are Socialist, or even worse, Communist.
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  They are socialist, but they should be available as well. Socialism isn't a bad word, and neither is Capitalism, both can be used in moderation. It's just the balance has swung way too far in the USA, and it's mostly controlled by corporations (and therefore is crony capitalism). The only place US citizens still have much power is in social reform and even that is being subjugated by crony appointments to the Supreme court and the Red states which are currently passing acts of oppression against LGBQT and women with nods from the Red supreme court.
pronlover723 5y ago
Billions are spent on art. Every video game, movie, cartoon, anime, song, comic book, coffee table book, and even ad, is art. There is arguably no reason the government needs to fund art as it's already extremely well funded.
- Forgeties79 5y ago
  >it’s already extremely well funded Pretty sure no one in the arts agrees with this. As a filmmaker I know I certainly don’t. What makes you say that? I’m curious where this opinion comes from.
  - quantumwannabe 5y ago
    You seem to think the arts is a bunch of connected people getting welfare to make terrible-to-mediocre art no one actually wants, and because that doesn't get obscene amounts of funding that the arts as a whole are underfunded. Movies, music, gaming, industrial design, advertising, architecture, publishing, and more are each individually billion dollar industries with an enormous amount of diversity in what is produced. Additionally, hobbyists can go easily semi-pro (or pro) nowadays thanks to websites like Amazon (books), YouTube (movies), SoundCloud (music), Etsy (design/physical art), and Patreon (other). The problem that you are describing is that people who make art that no one wants or people who suck at getting their art to people who like it are not rich. If you make something people like it is easier than any other time in history to make a living in art.
- zeruch 5y ago
  It isn't, and only someone who mostly consumes art but doesn't create it says otherwise. The possible exceptions being artists already regally compensated and upset they aren't making more (e.g. Don Henley) Take any city of cosmopolitan reputation, and take away their public arts programs and presence, and I guarantee in a generation, they will wither out, as the prestige/tourist status and even business status will decline. Take a city like San Jose where I live; smaller neighbors Oakland and SF have vibrant ecosystems between creatives and public works that fosters their reputations as places worth seeing. SJ has a small but active community that largely has to scrap for their own, such that its largely overlooked to the point that most of its best talent only gets known after it leaves for cities that will recognize them and provide tools an opptys for them (e.g. Cellista, Peanut Butter Wolf, etc). And even SF is pricing out creatives, such that many are booking for Oakland or out of state to continue. The arts are poorly funded, and in the few places they do better, tends to be in old bunkers where socialites can 'invest'/launder their money and get a surname placed on a building.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
> I yearn for the day Americans are willing to support something regardless of how much money it makes them. HN sneers about "voting against their own interest" when they do that.
- Forgeties79 5y ago
  Maybe I haven’t been around here long enough but this entire comment section is very disheartening and at least somewhat not what I expected. Seems like a lot of folks here simply think “if it isn’t particularly profitable/giving a direct ROI to investors, as well as self-sustaining, then it isn’t worth it.”

by drekk 5y ago

bgandrew 5y ago

As a person living outside of US I appreciate those 12 cents from you much more than 0.004. US provides at least some level of global security and I don't want this role to be taken by any other country. As for art, I always can look for other options.

stjohnswarts 5y ago
I would rather your own country pay for your own defense (and join NATO for a boost) but if the USA has to be a hegemony rather than Russia or China, I can see your point.
HWR_14 5y ago
We have enough money to do both! I like that the US military is a military superpower. And I like finding art (and healthcare, and a bunch of other things). If we stopped giving uber rich people unearned tax breaks, we could afford to do them trivially.
illusivesaint 5y ago
What global security? The military has done more harm than good and the reason no one fights back is because of how mighty it is and the IMF. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq, did it leave it better off? Or its influence in Latin America. How's it's going in Ukraine, other than selling weapons? You don't want the US to "protect" you.

4ggr0 5y ago

It seems like a lot of Americans are brainwashed into thinking that "public transit or worker pensions or guaranteed pay sick leave or..." are Socialist, or even worse, Communist.

stjohnswarts 5y ago
They are socialist, but they should be available as well. Socialism isn't a bad word, and neither is Capitalism, both can be used in moderation. It's just the balance has swung way too far in the USA, and it's mostly controlled by corporations (and therefore is crony capitalism). The only place US citizens still have much power is in social reform and even that is being subjugated by crony appointments to the Supreme court and the Red states which are currently passing acts of oppression against LGBQT and women with nods from the Red supreme court.

pronlover723 5y ago

Billions are spent on art. Every video game, movie, cartoon, anime, song, comic book, coffee table book, and even ad, is art. There is arguably no reason the government needs to fund art as it's already extremely well funded.

Forgeties79 5y ago
>it’s already extremely well funded Pretty sure no one in the arts agrees with this. As a filmmaker I know I certainly don’t. What makes you say that? I’m curious where this opinion comes from.
- quantumwannabe 5y ago
  You seem to think the arts is a bunch of connected people getting welfare to make terrible-to-mediocre art no one actually wants, and because that doesn't get obscene amounts of funding that the arts as a whole are underfunded. Movies, music, gaming, industrial design, advertising, architecture, publishing, and more are each individually billion dollar industries with an enormous amount of diversity in what is produced. Additionally, hobbyists can go easily semi-pro (or pro) nowadays thanks to websites like Amazon (books), YouTube (movies), SoundCloud (music), Etsy (design/physical art), and Patreon (other). The problem that you are describing is that people who make art that no one wants or people who suck at getting their art to people who like it are not rich. If you make something people like it is easier than any other time in history to make a living in art.
zeruch 5y ago
It isn't, and only someone who mostly consumes art but doesn't create it says otherwise. The possible exceptions being artists already regally compensated and upset they aren't making more (e.g. Don Henley) Take any city of cosmopolitan reputation, and take away their public arts programs and presence, and I guarantee in a generation, they will wither out, as the prestige/tourist status and even business status will decline. Take a city like San Jose where I live; smaller neighbors Oakland and SF have vibrant ecosystems between creatives and public works that fosters their reputations as places worth seeing. SJ has a small but active community that largely has to scrap for their own, such that its largely overlooked to the point that most of its best talent only gets known after it leaves for cities that will recognize them and provide tools an opptys for them (e.g. Cellista, Peanut Butter Wolf, etc). And even SF is pricing out creatives, such that many are booking for Oakland or out of state to continue. The arts are poorly funded, and in the few places they do better, tends to be in old bunkers where socialites can 'invest'/launder their money and get a surname placed on a building.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

> I yearn for the day Americans are willing to support something regardless of how much money it makes them. HN sneers about "voting against their own interest" when they do that.

Forgeties79 5y ago
Maybe I haven’t been around here long enough but this entire comment section is very disheartening and at least somewhat not what I expected. Seems like a lot of folks here simply think “if it isn’t particularly profitable/giving a direct ROI to investors, as well as self-sustaining, then it isn’t worth it.”