AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11677
October 16th, 2011 at 11:29:28 AM permalink
Quote: rxwine

That's the same idea that says, that the school district with the poor kids won't get the same exposure to various cultural opportunities because each district only funds what it can afford. Now take it to the federal level and simply let arts flourish only when a private entity will fund it.

Yeah, I realize if a kid never gets a federally funded symphony to his town, he can make a good living mispronouncing English doing whatever hip hop style he happens to have around him and that will be a suitable solution for many people. And I'm not specifically meaning minorities either.

Perhaps the idea of filling the world with more ghetto-ish or hillbilly characters is charming if it will save your wallet.



Seems like you are following the logic of "we can't cut anything because it might hurt someone, somewhere." You are also somehow buying into the ideal that liking the symphony will make you wealthy or that most wealthy people like the symphony. Neither is true.

And I don't quite get how having a symphony in town will keep someone from mispronouncing english.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 163
  • Posts: 9566
October 16th, 2011 at 1:09:48 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Seems like you are following the logic of "we can't cut anything because it might hurt someone, somewhere." You are also somehow buying into the ideal that liking the symphony will make you wealthy or that most wealthy people like the symphony. Neither is true.

And I don't quite get how having a symphony in town will keep someone from mispronouncing english.



Nah, I'm just rejecting the idea that providing cultural enrichment need only be where private enterprise will bother to fund it

Of course you have to believe cultural enrichment is good for not only those who can afford it, but those who can't.

There's no value in ignorance.
Quasimodo? Does that name ring a bell?
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
October 17th, 2011 at 11:24:10 AM permalink
Quote: rxwine

There's no value in ignorance.


There are many people in this country who disagree with this premise. I personally believe there is great harm in ignorance, but there is a strident anti-intellectual cadre in American politics that believes otherwise.

As to cultural enrichment, numerous studies have shown that students trained in musical performance have superior academic records (in the aggregate) than the average student. It is a shame that many so-called social conservatives find no value in the arts.

The only president over the past 25 years to decrease the deficit was a sax player. Just saying. :)
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11677
October 17th, 2011 at 3:25:52 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

As to cultural enrichment, numerous studies have shown that students trained in musical performance have superior academic records (in the aggregate) than the average student. It is a shame that many so-called social conservatives find no value in the arts.



A classic case of correlation <> causation. But it isn't a matter of "finding no value in the arts" but that we shouldn't be funding them at the level we are. People want their kids to play an insturment? Fine, pay for lessons. Same as if you put your kid in little league or any other number of extracurricular activites.

Quote:

The only president over the past 25 years to decrease the deficit was a sax player. Just saying. :)



Newt Gingrich, the man responsible for the balanced budget, was not president. The sax player you refer to fougt the balanced budget every step of the way.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
avargov
avargov
Joined: Aug 5, 2010
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 615
October 17th, 2011 at 3:29:36 PM permalink
I just choked on a tortilla chip when I read the Newt Gingrich comment.....
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11677
October 17th, 2011 at 3:50:39 PM permalink
Quote: avargov

I just choked on a tortilla chip when I read the Newt Gingrich comment.....



I guess you thought you were talking to someone who didn't remember the 1990s? Because Clinton fought the balanced budget every step of the way, going so far as to shut the government down to avoid cuts he didn't like.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
avargov
avargov
Joined: Aug 5, 2010
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 615
October 17th, 2011 at 4:00:59 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I guess you thought you were talking to someone who didn't remember the 1990s? Because Clinton fought the balanced budget every step of the way, going so far as to shut the government down to avoid cuts he didn't like.



Didn't even think about who I was talking to...just read the comment and nearly choked. I do my best to stay out of partisan politics, because, I know opinions can't be changed on either side, and both sides will defend the "truth" to the death.

I truly don't care what happens in politics. It generally doesn't affect me, and if it does, generally there is nothing I can do about it, other than try to bend rules into my favor. The rest is all rhetoric. No one really cares what I think, or what you think. "Healthy debate" is a waste of time as we are not in a position to change anything.

Now a third party, a real third party (not those libertarian jokers, most reasonable people stopped talking about that nonsense in high school), would be refreshing. I might even have an interest again if my choices were not always Jack Johnson and John Jackson. Like Carlin said, you ain't in the club, and you ain't ever gonna be in the club. So just bend over and let 'em screw you with the big red, white, and blue dildo. (paraphrased)

Otherwise, who cares who balanced a budged, who gets credit, who started the unpaid for wars, who started taxing unemployment, who pushed healthcare through, who screwed up social security, and so on and so on and so on. They are all exactly the same. No new ideas. It makes me sad to be part of the system sometimes.
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11677
October 17th, 2011 at 4:38:05 PM permalink
Quote: avargov

Now a third party, a real third party (not those libertarian jokers, most reasonable people stopped talking about that nonsense in high school), would be refreshing. I might even have an interest again if my choices were not always Jack Johnson and John Jackson.



I rarely understand what people seem to want in "a third party." Third party movements tend to be radical (Greens) or one-issue (Perot.) In the USA system third parties make little sense as you do not need a majority to form a government only a pluarality. If we had a parlimentary system and you needed a majority to "form a government" a third party has a bit of leverage. But you would still have the one-issue-or-racical-or-both problem.

A bigger issue is that Americans, quite frankly, need to grow up when it comes to politics. If all the candidates want to do is agree on everything we get people saying, "there is no choice!" (think Bush/Gore in the 2000.) If they draw differences people say they "hate all the fighting." (think Obama vs the GOP today.) I attribute much of this to the chick-ification of American Society since the early 1980s (even early 1970s.) Almost every guy running is afraid to be a John Wayne type.



Quote:

Otherwise, who cares who balanced a budged, who gets credit, who started the unpaid for wars, who started taxing unemployment, who pushed healthcare through, who screwed up social security, and so on and so on and so on. They are all exactly the same. No new ideas. It makes me sad to be part of the system sometimes.



Well, I care because I want to re-elect the people who really did the best job. People voted for Obama in part because they thought under Democrat Party rule the USA had a booming economy, in reality Clinton benefited from many things he had zero to do with. Now we are seeing what really happens when you keep calling for more taxes and regulation.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
October 17th, 2011 at 9:29:28 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

A classic case of correlation <> causation.


Do you actually think I am making such a logical fallacy? I meant exactly what I said. The studies I'm referring to have shown a causative effect on academic excellence, learning ability, and even brain size. As for paying for musical instrument lessons, thousands of parents are glad to do so but there is little point if there is no band or orchestra available in which their children can play. You speak as if you're a non-musician and don't understand how the public school system currently works (when music programs exist): students are expected to learn their instruments in lessons and practice on their own time. Ensemble rehearsal and performance are entirely different activities than individual practice. When school music budgets are cut, the ability of the student to take individual lessons is not affected. What's lost is the central program for students to rehearse and perform. You might argue that such a program could be more efficiently conducted by the private market, but I would counter that music education is the perfect example of what belongs in a publicly-funded educational system. Musical education makes you smarter, and cutting public funding for music education in schools is detrimental to the overall intelligence of our society. It's a mystery to me why anyone would want their kids to be dumber than they could be, but it's also a mystery to me why anyone would disfavor intelligence in general.

Is there any benefit in being less intelligent?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11677
October 18th, 2011 at 4:01:25 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

Do you actually think I am making such a logical fallacy? I meant exactly what I said. The studies I'm referring to have shown a causative effect on academic excellence, learning ability, and even brain size. As for paying for musical instrument lessons, thousands of parents are glad to do so but there is little point if there is no band or orchestra available in which their children can play. You speak as if you're a non-musician and don't understand how the public school system currently works (when music programs exist): students are expected to learn their instruments in lessons and practice on their own time. Ensemble rehearsal and performance are entirely different activities than individual practice. When school music budgets are cut, the ability of the student to take individual lessons is not affected. What's lost is the central program for students to rehearse and perform. You might argue that such a program could be more efficiently conducted by the private market, but I would counter that music education is the perfect example of what belongs in a publicly-funded educational system. Musical education makes you smarter, and cutting public funding for music education in schools is detrimental to the overall intelligence of our society. It's a mystery to me why anyone would want their kids to be dumber than they could be, but it's also a mystery to me why anyone would disfavor intelligence in general.

Is there any benefit in being less intelligent?



I positively hated music class. When we had a class singing program my reaction, and I am not joking here, my reaction to the class music pagent was that we were being punished for something. But I do have an idea how it works. When I was in school we had "music class" and there was "band." The former was required. Some of the kids enjoyed it, others like me felt it was what it must have been like if your bomber was shot down behind enemy lines and you had to sing propoganda songe. (Can you tell I HATED it?) The music teacher was on the general payroll. "Band" was optional with parents paying for the insturment and lessons. There was some sort of holiday and year end recital, which we saw as a school in the day then again for the families at night. In high school, all music and band was optional. After the last class of 8th grade I never sang another note in a music class.

The problem here is that back when I was in school (1970s-1980s) there was a music teacher on the payroll as part of the staff. Now, we spend more in real terms yet are told "the money is not there!" Well, there is a budget, so if we want music class then all other salaries need to be cut to fit it back in.

But my beef was directed more at the NEA. The NEA is a bunch of grants to fund "arts." But there is no reason for this in a developed country, or any country. History is full of men who funded arts, Andrew Carnegie one of the earlier ones. Or some people who made their fortune in the arts (Madonna, etc) should step up and do it.

We can't fund everything just because "it might be good."
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others

  • Jump to: