Forums: Community: The Soap Box: Re: [scrapedape] Are the republicans actually trying to lose?: Edit Log


Mar 16, 2012, 6:32 AM

Views: 2596

Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7129

Re: [scrapedape] Are the republicans actually trying to lose?
Report this Post

scrapedape wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
wjca wrote:
I think I'd be alright with getting rid of funding for the NEA with borrowed dollars. In lean times, the responsible person cuts back on luxury items: vacations, eating out a lot, going to the movies, etc. They don't simple start putting these things on a credit card and hope to pay them off one day. Unfortunately, there are a lot of financially irresponsible people that have done just that, and are now paying the price. Bankruptcy and foreclosure suck, but they happen to people that live above and beyond their means on borrowed dollars.

In my mind, I think things like the NEA are luxury items. I don't think it's financially responsible to pay for them with borrowed dollars. There are other programs I wouldn't fund either. I don't feel the same way about Planned Parenthood and others. The problem is that no one is ever going to agree on every program that should be put on hold until such time as we get our financial house in order. Hence the endless fighting. We may be doomed as a civilization because of our diversity.

That sort of thing's a dangerous strategy, though. Cutting long-running programs (arts, research, etc., etc.) in lean times might seem like a good way to save money, but in practice what happens is that they become very, very hard to reinstate when things improve. Why? Because all of the people previously funded by these programs suddenly find themselves in the unemployment queue and drift off into new careers. Many of them don't come back even when the funding does, meaning that there's nobody there to train the next generation. In the end, a great deal of experience and knowledge is simply lost.

An important distinction, I think, is between luxuries and necessities. In a lot of people's minds, research is not the same as the arts. Research is a necessity, the arts are a luxury.

An analogy: When you fall on hard times, you should probably still find a way to fix the roof, even if it means borrowing money. But at the same time, you should probably put off those kitchen renovations.
An even more important distinction, however, is between those who think that you can balance the budget by cutting funding for NEA and repealing health care reform;and those based in reality, where the NEA is a drop in the ocean and health care reform was designed to be deficit-reducing.

There is good precedent for fostering the arts in hard times.
Really, this “bitter pill”, punitive mentality that is being adopted by the trickle downers, in all its aspects, makes me ill. Raising tuition, more porous safety net, foreclosing on homes while bankers pull down fat bonuses, underfunding libraries….This is just more Social Darwinism/Prosperity Theology; the rich MUST be more fit/favored by God…because they're rich! If you’re poor, you MUST be a bad person. No art for you!

(This post was edited by traddad on Mar 16, 2012, 10:42 AM)

Edit Log:
Post edited by traddad () on Mar 16, 2012, 10:42 AM

Search for (options)

Log In:

Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$7.65 (10% off)
$6.75 (10% off)
$13.46 (10% off)
$621.00 (10% off)