Jack Layton: "We say the arts are at the core of the economy."
Am I saying I hate the arts? No. But to suggest the arts are what is driving the Canadian economy is so ridiculous that it's incredible that Jack can't understand why people don't take him seriously.
Arts funding is all well and good, but I have a feeling that for the vast number of average Canadians getting concerned about the pending economic situation, money for the arts that is instead diverted into other areas is probably a good thing, and I tend to think that even the most liberal of Canadians would agree that the arts are hardly at the core of the economy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Seems to me like Harper went to one extreme and Layton went to the other extreme. Is federal funding for the arts really a significant election platform/issue? Everyone is certainly throwing around a lot of rhetoric as if it is a crucial topic. Maybe that's because they've had a hard time pinning serious problems on Harper so far and this is their best chance so far...
I think that Harper is silly because he could have just said that there were other priorities to focus on. He may have the focus and the will to be the P.M. but he isn't very good at the political soft-talk...
Actually, I think it's brilliant politicking on Harper's part. He makes Layton look ridiculous, and goes after the minds of the middle-of-the-road voters who are trying to decide if they are going to vote for him.
A arts-loving-hipster-doofus would never vote for Harper anyways, so he doesn't care if he takes a shot at them to solidify support in the middle.
At least, that's how I'd read it. Harper, faults or not, is a smart guy when it comes to politics.
I'll give you that. Harper is quite the political strategist. That was the most interesting thing that I learned about him when I read his biography...
The NDP and Libs just seem to be copying each other right now, from playing the environmental card to making parallel daycare announcements on the same day to their attacks on Harper. No wonder Layton is suggesting a coalition government, the two parties are mimicing each other...
Sigh. A rather long comment, eaten by the interwebs.
The gist of what I said: I've already discussed this matter with friends on facebook. I said that I don't know how vital government funding of the arts is; there will always be artists, government funds or no, just like there will always be scientists, big pharmaceutical funding or no.
That being said, only a tiny little bean counter can't find some room in the freakin' federal budget to fund one of the most persistent and extraordinary human activities.
Mike
Well sure. But $45 million here, is a $45 million that can't be spent on something else. And right now, with the way the economy is looking, that $45 million would seem to have a better use in a different department.
Is the Federal budget really so tight and carefully laid out that money for the arts would genuinely take money away from vital matters? I have a hard time believing that. There is no bloat, no pork? No money going to things that smell a little funny?
We can always find time and money for the things we find truly important. Vague, general arguments about "fiscal conservatism" always strike me as quaint.
$45 million dollars is alot of money, even in the federal budget.
Post a Comment