3 ms·
Why? Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions.
by 627467 3y ago
Why? Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions.
- Dylan16807 3y ago> Why? Because that method makes it act more like permanent single ownership than something cultural. > Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions. Whether the result is good is different from how far it's pushing, and I think the result sounds like it has the potential to be helpful. But I don't like how closely it ties revenue to the popularity of each museum's specific artifacts, since these are public institutions.
- opello 3y ago> Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions. If it's culturally valuable then the members of that cultural group can (probably happily) pay for that upkeep? Presumably covering some shortage if tourism doesn't satisfy the base need to keep the artifacts intact?