Posts: 7,603
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
197
*rolls eyes*...
If you folks aren't interested in a serious conversation, that's fine.
By the way, I never said fine art, capitalism has no problem creating wealthy people and corporations to commission or own their own pieces. Public art on the other hand is what the discussion was actually about.
Posts: 2,003
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
124
(11-10-2020, 03:07 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: *rolls eyes*...
If you folks aren't interested in a serious conversation, that's fine.
By the way, I never said fine art, capitalism has no problem creating wealthy people and corporations to commission or own their own pieces. Public art on the other hand is what the discussion was actually about.
I get your hypothesis, but it just doesn't seem to be supported by evidence.
Posts: 1,975
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
37
(11-10-2020, 03:56 PM)jamincan Wrote: (11-10-2020, 03:07 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: *rolls eyes*...
If you folks aren't interested in a serious conversation, that's fine.
By the way, I never said fine art, capitalism has no problem creating wealthy people and corporations to commission or own their own pieces. Public art on the other hand is what the discussion was actually about.
I get your hypothesis, but it just doesn't seem to be supported by evidence.
More seriously, City of Waterloo has had a one percent for public art policy since 1996. City will reserve up to 1% for projects over $1M, up to a max of $300k. I guess developer contributions can help with bonusing ("Section 37 of the Planning Act") and private sector/community donations are "encouraged".
Posts: 6,491
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
88
Kitchener, Cambridge, and RofW also have public art policies, iinm.
Posts: 1,101
Threads: 6
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
99
RED Automotive - Victoria Street
Coke
Posts: 6,491
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
88
Wow! Who's the artist? More, more, more, please!
Posts: 7,603
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
197
11-11-2020, 10:31 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-11-2020, 10:34 AM by danbrotherston.)
(11-10-2020, 03:56 PM)jamincan Wrote: (11-10-2020, 03:07 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: *rolls eyes*...
If you folks aren't interested in a serious conversation, that's fine.
By the way, I never said fine art, capitalism has no problem creating wealthy people and corporations to commission or own their own pieces. Public art on the other hand is what the discussion was actually about.
I get your hypothesis, but it just doesn't seem to be supported by evidence.
Fair enough, you're welcome to have a differing opinion, mine is not...well researched, although I do still feel it is valid. I was mainly put off by the sarcastic retort.
(11-10-2020, 11:31 PM)plam Wrote: (11-10-2020, 03:56 PM)jamincan Wrote: I get your hypothesis, but it just doesn't seem to be supported by evidence.
More seriously, City of Waterloo has had a one percent for public art policy since 1996. City will reserve up to 1% for projects over $1M, up to a max of $300k. I guess developer contributions can help with bonusing ("Section 37 of the Planning Act") and private sector/community donations are "encouraged".
(11-11-2020, 12:14 AM)panamaniac Wrote: Kitchener, Cambridge, and RofW also have public art policies, iinm.
These things are clearly anti-free-market-capitalism.
A central organization taking money and using central planning to decide to spend it on arts is not the free hand of the market. The fact that we do this, recognizes that it is important, but that the free market won't achieve it on it's own.
Of course, I did say before, we only pretend to be free-market-capitalist, in reality we contort the market all the time because we see how it fails.
Posts: 4,340
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2015
Reputation:
180
(11-11-2020, 10:31 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Of course, I did say before, we only pretend to be free-market-capitalist, in reality we contort the market all the time because we see how it fails.
It’s not that simple. We contort the market for many reasons, ranging from essential to utterly bogus. For example, parking minima in dense urban areas.
Posts: 7,603
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
197
11-11-2020, 03:55 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-11-2020, 03:57 PM by danbrotherston.)
(11-11-2020, 03:31 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: (11-11-2020, 10:31 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Of course, I did say before, we only pretend to be free-market-capitalist, in reality we contort the market all the time because we see how it fails.
It’s not that simple. We contort the market for many reasons, ranging from essential to utterly bogus. For example, parking minima in dense urban areas.
Umm...you're probably right in general, but I'd actually disagree with the parking minima example
Parking minima were added because of a market failure (drivers parking their vehicles all over the public right of way), it just happens to be the wrong way to solve the market failure. It more shows the limitation of central planning...choosing parking minima was a bad choice, the free market would never have done that, if we had solved the problem in another way (say by summarily crushing all illegally parked vehicles) the free market would have provided a more efficient solution to parking.
I'd say things like economic development funds are a "bogus" example. We invest in them because they help our city to do better, but ultimately it's a zero sum game, if we had invested in things which actually make our city better, it would have been just as effective--albeit harder to figure out. We are trying to put a finger on the market to slant it our way, but not because of a market failure, but because we'd rather win.
But we are getting really off topic here.
Posts: 4,913
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
119
Posts: 800
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation:
77
I think this is new, on 44 Gaukel
|