Started By
Message

re: Trump's budget cuts 100% of the National Endowment for the Arts

Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:20 pm to
Posted by weagle99
Member since Nov 2011
35893 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:20 pm to
quote:

And you have to admit the vast majority of Trumpkins have absolutely no interest and are clueless about the arts.


It is fun to watch you engage in stereotyping while at the same time being part of a group that doesn't want to be stereotyped.
Posted by Strannix
District 11
Member since Dec 2012
48917 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:20 pm to
quote:

Because in the realm of the wealthy, closeness to arts and philanthropy is the most valuable commodity. It is - literally - more valuable than money. Why do you think the Koch brothers bought Lincoln Center?


Ok let's try to speak English here, you stated they arts are huge writeoffs for corporations, hence they give money to the arts. So what difference would NEA funding make? You can't be this stupid
Posted by mahdragonz
Member since Jun 2013
6936 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:20 pm to
quote:

They just don't see why the federal government is needed to pay for these things.


Wrong.

It's an investment in the country.

The play Hamilton (the writer at least) was able to workshop and develop his work through a fed grant.

It's on its way to make a billion dollars.

I can't remember the figure, but it was less than 100k. That is a TREMENDOUS return on investment.

It's the R&D equivalent of science.
Posted by bhtigerfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
29439 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:21 pm to
quote:

$148 million. That's enough to pay about an hours interest on the national debt.
Yet you complain everytime Trump flies to FL on Air Force One.
Posted by Ted2010
Member since Oct 2010
38958 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:21 pm to
Sad.
Posted by mahdragonz
Member since Jun 2013
6936 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:21 pm to
quote:

Ok let's try to speak English here, you stated they arts are huge writeoffs for corporations, hence they give money to the arts. So what difference would NEA funding make? You can't be this stupid


The NEA is the Rolls Royce of philanthropy.

Look at the corporate matches and you will understand why it will never go away.
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:22 pm to
quote:

Agreed. We shouldn't be paying for EITHER of them



Protecting the first family is a responsibility of the United States Secret Service and LEOs are the appropriate people to protect them.

Private security isn't going to cut it as they do not have the force of law behind them and are very limited in their use of force against would be attackers and preventing them.
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
67081 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:24 pm to
quote:

The play Hamilton (the writer at least) was able to workshop and develop his work through a fed grant


The NEA isn't going away if it loses federal funding. He would have still gotten the grant, and probably would have gotten it faster. Being a part of the government, the NEA has all kinds of crazy paperwork requirements and layers of beaurocracy one has to go through to get a grant. They even have to consider factors such as sensitivity to religious groups and other political considerations to avoid running afoul of federal establishment clause issues. Spinning off the NEA and making it private would actually free them from many of these restrictions, allowing them to issue more grants, and process them more quickly
This post was edited on 3/15/17 at 10:28 pm
Posted by Rakim
Member since Nov 2015
9954 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:24 pm to
Trump doesn't really want to cut the arts.

It's a negotiation tactic. People really don't understand Trump.
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
67081 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:25 pm to
quote:

Protecting the first family is a responsibility of the United States Secret Service and LEOs are the appropriate people to protect them.


If they don't want to live in the white house, they should personally fit the bill for the Secret Service that protect them.
This post was edited on 3/15/17 at 10:26 pm
Posted by Sody Cracker
Distemper Ward
Member since May 2016
3409 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:26 pm to
quote:

It seems like the budget for the NEA is only around $148M, which isn't much in comparison to the overall budget. And obviously, cutting this program will have a big impact on kids in the low end of the economic ladder.


If that figure is correct, that is 1.48 billion over ten years. That is ridiculous.
Posted by Jjdoc
Cali
Member since Mar 2016
53468 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:26 pm to
quote:

$148 million. That's enough to pay about an hours interest on the national debt.




That's the worst excuse that doesn't work anymore. If alone, you wouldn't even have a valid point.

In the context of a 30% cut in the EPA and a 20% cut in all agencies within the executive branch etc etc....

It

ALL

ADDS

UP
Posted by AgentOrange71
New Orleans
Member since Mar 2017
75 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:28 pm to
quote:

$148 million. That's enough to pay about an hours interest on the national debt.





Or a weekend in mar-a-lago
Posted by Jyrdis
TD Premium Member Level III
Member since Aug 2015
12796 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:28 pm to
quote:

So, in you opinion, where do you draw the line between what should be funded by the federal government and what shouldn't?


Someone never took a public finance or constitutional law course.
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:28 pm to
quote:

If they don't want to live in the white house, they should personally fit the bill for the Secret Service that protect them.


The President is already living in the White House and they will be joining him in the summer when the first son finishes the school year and the first lady already commutes a lot for important events where her presence is customary.
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
67081 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:29 pm to
Exactly. They should foot the bill in the meantime.
Posted by AUsteriskPride
Albuquerque, NM
Member since Feb 2011
18385 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:30 pm to
That is spectacular. Not one time have I ever read the Constitution and came away with the thought that we should tax people more in order to advance the "arts".
Posted by Toddy
Atlanta
Member since Jul 2010
27250 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:30 pm to
quote:

Don't forget protecting his bastard children


Exactly. I wonder if we're paying to protect his other two baby mamas also?
Posted by Emiliooo
Member since Jun 2013
5148 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:32 pm to
quote:

Someone never took a public finance or constitutional law course.

Nope, and that's why I asked the question. Thank you for your observation.
Posted by Jjdoc
Cali
Member since Mar 2016
53468 posts
Posted on 3/15/17 at 10:33 pm to
quote:

And you have to admit the vast majority of Trumpkins have absolutely no interest and are clueless about the arts.


And this is why the Dems are at their lowest point since the 1920s.

Jump to page
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 10
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 10Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram