Why do people oppose selling public art treasures to raise money for something actually useful....?

Question

..like curing disease..eliminating poverty...etc....

Answer 1

The "arts" people do not care about people, they stake more value in art or crap they call art than a live person.

Answer 2

Can you imagine the world without the Mona-Lisa? or a Monet? or Mozart? or Beethoven? As important as it is to cure diseases or seeking to find a way to eliminating poverty the world of art and music are also important. Even in the darkness we need light...music, art, the writings of story tellers and poets. They bring beauty and hope. They inspire people to reach higher and beyond themselves. If all the great works were sold and locked away what would be left? Think of all the great works that were lost to Hitler during WW2...people still search for them today. Useful is good and necessary, but you have to see the forest in spite of the trees...we all need balance.

Answer 3

We spend a lot of money on disease research already - the money we would get from public art treasures would be a drop in the bucket toward the already funded efforts about disease. And public art treasures are treasures, that last throughout the ages and are records of our past and an inspiration to everyone.

Answer 4

Have you ever read ANYTHING in history books or elsewhere that actually even came close to "curing disease" or "eliminating poverty"? No matter how much money you pour down those drains, there will always be disease and poverty on planet earth. God Bless you.

Answer 5

They feel preserving history is more important than the cause. They could very well be correct in speaking that money can be raised in other ways, but historic items are priceless in the sense that they're the only ones of their kind for that specific time period they represent.

Answer 6

This assumes that the arts serve no useful purpose.

It's a shallow perspective.