osamanobama said:
theprof00 said:
osamanobama said:
theprof00 said:
osamanobama said:
this is stupid
our goverment shouldnt be giving money for this type of stuff.
for games, painters, movies or anything. stop wasting our money. if "art" cant survive without these grants, then they dont deserve to stay around.
our goverment needs to stop picking winners and losers, thats not capitalism.
|
Endowments are provided by other people. People donate to the NEA, and is given to other people who show talent. Get it? It's like american idol. Rich guy pays money to find talented people, and then supports them.
|
the article makes it sound like the government is giving out these grants, which im against no matter what it is. whether its art, energy efficient windows, subsidising ethonal, subsidising that material that WWII unimforms where made out of, whatever. government should pick favorites, choosing winners and losers.
if this is private donors, i have nothing against it, but if it is from private rich people giving, then why does our government have to recognize it as art
|
While I don't want to start a political skirmish, I must say that your stance on subsidies is far too black and white. Subsidies are proven, they make sense, and they work. The problem is that the government doesn't do enough to clamp down on the loop-holers. Similarly to the top 1% that don't pay nearly in taxes what they are supposed to pay due to loopholes, the best example comes from farming subsidies. I believe that farm subsidies, specifically corn, should end, or change.
However, subsidies are a great way to help bring certain things to sustainable levels. Like energy efficiency, or alternative energy like solar panels, the problem with the pricing is that the manufacturer hasn't reached a level of demand where the costs could greatly drop. However, for a lot of these energy alternatives, it is proven that they will ONE DAY have that demand, but really only when gas has reach like 8-10$ per barrel, then the demand wil go up, and the price will come down. Right now, solar panels and similar tech could be produced for the price the gasoline goes for, and we CAN get that relief either now, or when gas is double what it is now.
Bottom line is that for those technologies that could be producing at a very marketable level NOW, subsidies makes sense. The people who infringe and take advantage of subsidies give it a very bad name, and make people dislike it in general.
I will agree that subsidies are out of control.
|
i agree, we should definitely eliminate loop-holes/ people from all tax brackets (especially from rich ones) take way to much advantage of these. we need to simplify out tax code, get rid of deductions, loop holes, exemptions, etc. and lower tax rates for every one.
but for subsidies, thats different. thats the government taking your money and giving it to someone else. meaning chosing winners and losers. thats not captalism. for things like alternative energy, im all for it. but right now most of it isnt viable alternative. if it was, the market would take care of it, and government wouldnt have to throw billions of dollars at it. the market chooses whats right for consumers, goverment doesnt. government creates artificial prices, and takes away jobs from other sources, that are proven. the day that solar, wind or whatever energy becomes an ecinomical alternative, trust me there will be thousands of people wanting to get a slice of the pie. the market determines when that comes. and ironically enough its also goverment that keeps us from being energy independent, and keeps us from using alternative energy. we cant drill our own oil, we cant make solar fields in the middle of the dessert, we cant make wind farms, miles of our coasts, and we cant make nuclear plants, all because of politicians. when government interfers with the free market they stop advancement in everything, including energy
|
