English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

I have wondered that myself! Arts, although an important part of our social well being, should be self supporting. Governments wordwide give money to ALL arts just to buy votes.

2006-09-01 06:43:29 · answer #1 · answered by Funny Frankie 4 · 0 1

thier are more important thing then art wouldnt that be selfish???
like ex thiers a zoo that needs help and the gov't isnt going to help so they will close down wouldnt that be important .. not every poor person has the mind or talent for art. i d say more jobs and better paying jobs. but the gov't dont care about crap all they do is promise and dont do anything but help people from other countries while this country needs help itself. they say thier will be another depresion again in the future . and it will be the gov't fault for not doing *****

2006-09-01 13:48:41 · answer #2 · answered by angel eyes 2 · 1 0

The budget for the humanities and arts is so low. It is worse for the latter. At least humanities is practical enough that it warrants government investment to fund certain types of scholarship but which of us who have given our lives toward literary accomplishents actually get some type of renumeration from the federal government. We are allowed to perish the way Plato wanted to exile the artists from the city state; but for him it was because he saw how artists could have an impact on human minds which would easily immitate them. In our case, however, governments see them as irrelevant and their impact as negligible. Do I see the need to educate and feed the poor as important? Yes, it is extremely important and true diplomacy in the world comes from earning trust by showing oneself to be a benefactor instead of a warrior. As an American living in Bangkok Thailand I know how the world disparages our country for good reason. Can we have such an incredible GNP and yet devote so much of our resources to the military and so little as donations to the needy? It seems surreal that such a thing can happen in the world

2006-09-01 13:51:38 · answer #3 · answered by Steven S 2 · 0 1

The gov't doesn't really give that much money to the arts, in fact, it generally cuts funding on projects year every year.

That and the arts are generally accept to enrich our lives.

2006-09-01 13:48:26 · answer #4 · answered by madeleinesurfs 2 · 0 1

What I wonder about is why the government gives money to the tobacco companies, oil companies and gun manufacturers.

Those are all profitable businesses and shouldn't need help.

They should give more to artists. What funding does go out usually goes to rich artists who have connections... that ought to change.

And they definitely should help feed poor children.

But those aren't the priorities of the fat cats who claim to govern us. It's all pork.

2006-09-01 16:10:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Because arts feed the mind

2006-09-01 13:42:20 · answer #6 · answered by Pink Rose 2 · 0 1

I wish I knew what government "gives so much money to the arts."

2006-09-01 14:38:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

After WWII ended, I think Winston Churchill said it best when he was approached by his cabinet minister in charge of the budget. The cabinet minister wanted to cut the budget for the arts. Churchill replied, "What in the h*ll do you think we have been fighting for!"

2006-09-01 14:40:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

because artists are poor! I could use some help from them! ;)

2006-09-01 13:40:43 · answer #9 · answered by kermit 6 · 0 1

because it is "culture".

2006-09-01 13:45:19 · answer #10 · answered by Scorpius59 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers