CPCFTW Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) No, I love to point out that stupid opinions are stupid. Here is a simple argument the truth of which is obvious to everyone except you, apparently. 1) The United States is the World's only superpower. 2) The United States's culture is not the only culture people foreign to that culture care about. 3) Therefore it is false that no one cares about foreign cultures other than those of world superpowers. What other cultures do people of the world care most about? The cultures of former superpowers or near-superpowers. Begone infant. Edited May 26, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
Shwa Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 It's called an opinion. Well, unless you are retarded, even the most basic opinion should have grounds or some sort of base in fact. My opinion is that very few in the world care about taxpayer funded arts like little mosque on the prairie or heartland. You may have your own opinion. Well, if that is all you can refer to when it comes to Canadian tax-funded art, I can see why you hold your "opinion." It's ok, I know that when you lefties are taking a break from smelling your own farts, you love to point out that any opinion that differs from yours is stupid and uneducated. It appears that that odour you smell is the result of you pulling your "opinions" directly from your narrow anus. Now, go read some Canadian literature like Atwood, Ondaatje or Kinsella, while viewing some Tom Thompson paintings. And plenty of people liked Dan Akroyd, John Candy and Catherine O'Hara when they were on 'Coming Up Rosie' when it was on the CBC. Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) ...you love to point out that any opinion that differs from yours is stupid and uneducated. This coming from one of the most irrational posters on this forum whose only goal is to "win" arguments by ignoring valid counter points entirely. lol. Edited May 26, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
Michael Hardner Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 I'm sorry, I don't have a citation for my opinion that people in China are more interested in Transformers and Inception than Little Mosque on the Prairie and Men with Brooms. I don't have a cite that explains why your opinion is over simplified. People are interested in local culture, even if there are dominant cultures out there. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Evening Star Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 Cutting the per vote subsidy and scrapping the gun registry won't even scratch the surface, so what are they going to cut? It's unlikely they will raise taxes and in all liklihood will cut taxes further. That leaves only spending cuts which they also seem to be unwilling to do. I'm definitely a supporter of the increased military spending but honestly we cannot afford to similtaneously cut taxes and increase spending. The CPC platform was completely ludicrous and I'm surprised so many bought it. IIRC, it promised tax cuts, no cuts to the major social programmes, increased military and law-and-order spending, and balancing the books with unspecified 'efficiencies'. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 This thread is on the verge of becoming an insult fest. Why not talk about arguments, opinions and ideas not each other ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Evening Star Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) I don't have a cite that explains why your opinion is over simplified. People are interested in local culture, even if there are dominant cultures out there. It doesn't even make sense. Anyone who's unaware of Canada's world-leading position in popular music can't be taken seriously as a commentator on culture. Edited May 26, 2011 by Evening Star Quote
Remiel Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 What other cultures do people of the world care most about? The cultures of former superpowers or near-superpowers. Begone infant. Hahahahaha... You move the goal posts and then accuse me of being the infant? Let me remind you of what you said: No one other than hippies cares about the arts and culture of a country unless they are a global superpower. "Global superpower," is NOT the same thing as "former superpower" or "near-superpower". And frankly, it is false anyway. Italy gets a lot of coverage and it is not anywhere near a superpower. Jewish culture gets a lot of coverage too, and they are not superpowers by any means. And never mind that there it does not even follow from a culture not being an important export commodity that it is not an important domestic commodity. Begone, thoughtless drone. Quote
Evening Star Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 And fwiw the Canada Council's annual budget is $190 M (http://www.canadacouncil.ca/aboutus/StratPlan2011-16/of129164316419268225.htm ). CBC/Radio-Canada has an annual budget of $1.7B ( http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/media/facts/20100513.shtml ). Ending these programmes altogether won't even balance the books. Quote
guyser Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 It's called an opinion. Ok taxpayer funded arts like little mosque on the prairie or heartland. You may have your own opinion. Would you have any facts to back that up? It's ok, I know that when you lefties are taking a break from smelling your own farts, you love to point out that any opinion that differs from yours is stupid and uneducated. Naw, just stupid and erroneous opinions that arent based in facts. But dont let that stop you ! I mean, it hasnt yet, Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) And fwiw the Canada Council's annual budget is $190 M (http://www.canadacouncil.ca/aboutus/StratPlan2011-16/of129164316419268225.htm ). CBC/Radio-Canada has an annual budget of $1.7B ( http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/media/facts/20100513.shtml ). Ending these programmes altogether won't even balance the books. But, should we be paying to support them? They aren't essential to the well being of people like Education and Healthcare are. Cutting both CBC and Canada Council saves just over 6% of the federal deficit of $29.4 billion and does not affect the quality of life of Canadians. If people want art and entertainment, they pay for it. Edited May 26, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
Saipan Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 It doesn't even make sense. Anyone who's unaware of Canada's world-leading position in popular music can't be taken seriously as a commentator on culture. Popular music to one is a trash to someone else. Quote
bloodyminded Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 My comment was related to any and all entitlement programs, but yes, it would include health care. It always amazes me both on this forum and on the US one I frequent how entrenched and closed-minded so many people are if anyone suggests even looking at the prevailing health care system, let alone modifying it in any way. I should buy more tinfoil stock. I wasn't talking about modifying it. I was talking specifically about a hypothetical in which it was dismantled. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Saipan Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 If people want art and entertainment, they pay for it. True. My present peeve and fight with (local) government. Why should I be paying for hockey or golf if I don't play it? Or why should one with no children in school be paying more school taxes than someone with four in school? Quote
Shwa Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 But, should we be paying to support them? They aren't essential to the well being of people like Education and Healthcare are. Cutting both CBC and Canada Council saves just over 6% of the federal deficit of $29.4 billion and does not affect the quality of life of Canadians. If people want art and entertainment, they pay for it. So then sculptures in public spaces are out of the question, as are paintings in public buildings and government offices? No free access to arts and culture for the disadvantaged of course, because their "quality of life" needs no affect. Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons? Quote
GostHacked Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 It doesn't even make sense. Anyone who's unaware of Canada's world-leading position in popular music can't be taken seriously as a commentator on culture. I wish my music was more popular. Can I haz grant? Quote
RNG Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 I wasn't talking about modifying it. I was talking specifically about a hypothetical in which it was dismantled. That is a hypothetical that is so incredibly unlikely to be suggested or attempted by any political party as to not deserve any consideration. Hell, even the Reform, at their inception never suggested that. Quote The government can't give anything to anyone without having first taken it from someone else.
CPCFTW Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) Hahahahaha... You move the goal posts and then accuse me of being the infant? Let me remind you of what you said: "Global superpower," is NOT the same thing as "former superpower" or "near-superpower". And frankly, it is false anyway. Italy gets a lot of coverage and it is not anywhere near a superpower. Jewish culture gets a lot of coverage too, and they are not superpowers by any means. It was a one line quip which I clarified.... not moving the goal posts. Italy was not a superpower? Have you heard of the Roman empire? And I thought the Zionists ruled the world? You lefties need to make up your minds. And never mind that there it does not even follow from a culture not being an important export commodity that it is not an important domestic commodity. Begone, thoughtless drone. It's not an important enough domestic "commodity" to cause us to in-debt future generations of Canadians so we can produce 6 seasons of Little Mosque on the Prairie. Arts and culture is a business, if it is widely appreciated, then the producer of it will profit. It is counter-intuitive to subsidize it. If you are subsidizing art, it means that the art (that you are forcing everyone to pay for) does not hold a wide enough appeal to stand alone. Edited May 26, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
Shwa Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 True. My present peeve and fight with (local) government. Why should I be paying for hockey or golf if I don't play it? Or why should one with no children in school be paying more school taxes than someone with four in school? Really Saipan? Do you need to be told why again and again? Quote
bloodyminded Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 And I thought the Zionists ruled the world? You lefties need to make up your minds. no one here is saying that...and actually, that is a cherished note of the anti-semitic Right, not the Left, where it remains a marginal idiocy. Arts and culture is a business It's much more than that. Only the most hardcore Marxists and Chicago-school fanatics hold to such a total materialist perspective. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
CPCFTW Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) Only the most hardcore Marxists and Chicago-school fanatics hold to such a total materialist perspective. Arts are supposed to hold a wide appeal. If the appeal is wide enough, then the creator of the art can generate a profit for his creation. If you are subsidizing art, it means that the art does not hold that wide appeal. All I'm saying is that art should not be subsidized because any subsidized art has been deemed unworthy to be labelled "art" by society. How hard is that to understand? If I take a shit on a piece of paper and label it art, it won't have a wide appeal, and I likely won't be able to sell my "art" for a reasonable standard of living. I can't ask the taxpayers to pay my living expenses so that I can continue to create "art" instead of getting a job. Edited May 26, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
Scotty Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 (edited) Yeah, he needs to scrap the jet purchase until we can afford it. The cost of the jets is over more than two decades. It's not all paid up front. You want to wait another two decades before buying them? That's past the lifetime of the current jets. Edited May 26, 2011 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 It doesn't even make sense. Anyone who's unaware of Canada's world-leading position in popular music can't be taken seriously as a commentator on culture. World leading? Hardly. And those Canadian music artists popular elsewhere mostly do it without government help. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 But, should we be paying to support them? They aren't essential to the well being of people like Education and Healthcare are. No, they're not, but do we really want cities which have nothing in the way of galleries, live theater, ballet, orchestras, or whatever, just because we want to pinch pennies? I mean, it really doesn't amount to all that much in the scheme of things. Even the CBC, which is more expensive, does perform a useful function, not so much in the big cities, but in the more rural areas nobody else will serve. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
bloodyminded Posted May 26, 2011 Report Posted May 26, 2011 Arts are supposed to hold a wide appeal. For tha majority of arts, wide appeal is a relatively recent phenomenon. If the appeal is wide enough, then the creator of the art can generate a profit for his creation. If you are subsidizing art, it means that the art does not hold that wide appeal. All I'm saying is that art should not be subsidized because any subsidized art has been deemed unworthy to be labelled "art" by society. How hard is that to understand? It's not hard to understand. It's so easy to understand that I actually sympathize with this view. But I think it's incorrect. If I take a shit on a piece of paper and label it art, it won't have a wide appeal, and I likely won't be able to sell my "art" for a reasonable standard of living. I can't ask the taxpayers to pay my living expenses so that I can continue to create "art" instead of getting a job. It is problematic, for exactly the reasons you state. (So is going to war when our southern neighbour gives us a knowing look, for even more obvious reasons.) From an economics perspective, think of subsidized art as a "trickle-down" theory. It enriches society as a whole. Yes, some of it is useless. But overall, it pays for itself in numerous ways. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.