It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Reportedly Plans to Eliminate National Endowments for the Arts, Humanities

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   
We're in for an interesting 4 years...! I came across this article where it says that Donald Trump plans to eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities. This is based on the beluief that taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for creative ventures especially, since private donors contribute to the Arts.



On 19 January 2017, The Hill, citing unnamed sources from inside President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team, reported that (among other cuts) Trump plans to eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities: The National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be eliminated entirely. According to their website, the National Endowment of the Arts is: an independent federal agency that funds, promotes, and strengthens the creative capacity of our communities by providing all Americans with diverse opportunities for arts participation. The National Endowment for the Humanities describes their mission in the following way: Because democracy demands wisdom, NEH serves and strengthens our republic by promoting excellence in the humanities and conveying the lessons of history to all Americans. The Endowment accomplishes this mission by awarding grants for top-rated proposals examined by panels of independent, external reviewers.


I am speechless, ATS but somehow I feel that this is just the beginning of some shocking revelations brought to you and I by the Trumpster. If this comes to pass then what else could be on the chopping block? Planned Parenthood, Public Education, Healthcare? Trump is now in a position of immense power. Do you think he'll do what's right for the average American or his rich powerful friends? What says ATS?

www.snopes.com...




posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

where you went wrong is you let 'unnamed sources' slip you by in the first sentence of the article.


+12 more 
posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

I possess a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree, and I love art.

But I agree with the comment that I don't think that the federal government should be using taxpayer dollars to pay for it.

There are a LOT of things that the federal government should not be paying for, subsidizing, or usurping control over--the three listed in your latter paragraph are pretty good examples.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   
good



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Well, you know what they are saying about a liberal arts degree...do you want fries with that?
edit on 20-1-2017 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: lostbook

where you went wrong is you let 'unnamed sources' slip you by in the first sentence of the article.


My mistake. I'm in a bit of a rush right now. Yes, the article does say "Unnamed" sources within the Trump cabinet. However, that shouldn't refute the importance of this information.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Make Punk Great Again



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Absolutely wonderful news!



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Please don't subsidize the arts but I beg of you to continue to subsidize companies that are already making profits.

That's the American way.


www.politicususa.com...
edit on 20-1-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   
GOOD!!

Hmmm,should they help the unfortunate,the economy and healthcare or give money to some college or university educated person to draw pictures or make sculptures??
Humanity can still go on without all the bad art.

Even the "good" art is usually just a bunch of pretentious people,standing in front of it, pretending they know what they are looking at so they can feel better about their emotionally crippled lives.

No big loss here.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I have seen mastery like Rembrandt and Michelangelo,then I have seen stuff like Jackson Pollocks 'Blue Poles' which is now worth $350 million(our national gallery bought it for $1.3 so not a bad return).$350 million for something my dog Barny could do,this is the problem its relative and too damned expensive these days for the public purse



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

No-that's the liberal way.

People want things-they are going to have to start paying for them.

Probably the left's greatest fear is losing the votes of the groups that working Americans pay for almost every aspect of said group's lives.

Hopefully,his cuts will include a "You pop a baby out-you pay for it" cut in the VERY near future.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

With the country in such a big deficit,I agree any money appropriated for this should be to pay down deficit major overhaul needs to be done,like the free cell phones,and I could go on,years of fiscal irresonsibility,now we are paying for it



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Making America Great again, great move if true because Govt paid for "Art" is more factually known as State Sponsored Propaganda.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I agree.


Arts is not nessary for national survival and should be handled by the private sector.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
I would recommend withholding Billions of our taxpayer dollars from countries that don't like us, first.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
It would be a good move. The government is full of programs that have no constitutional basis at all, but are the result of some do-gooder lobby group proclaiming that the government "needs" to support whatever crazy cause is at hand. And, of course, once you start something up like that, it can never be rescinded. That's how government grows into the monster it has become. This may get you "free government money" for whatever cause you think is great, but it is not good for the citizens of this country. It creates a dependence, and once you do that the government not only funds it, but guides it in the direction government wants it to go.

A very good example of this is in scientific research. And a good example of THAT is climate change research. Now I'm not going all climate-denier on you here. Climate change is obvious, and I suspect we've had a hand in it. That begs the question of what to DO about it, but that's not the argument here. The argument is that when you look at RFP's (Request for Proposals) for climate change study, those proposals REQUIRE the successful grantee to "prove" man made climate change by one way or another. Now because the prevailing paradigm is that "we caused all warming" most scientists won't question that premise, but will eagerly apply for grants to further prove the paradigm. Now what do you think happens if a scientist comes along and says, "Climate change is actually caused by Sun variations, and we are due for another Ice Age, and I can prove it." Do you think he'd get the grant? THAT'S what is wrong with government funding. People get very used to sucking at the government teat and will do ANYTHING to remain sucking.


edit on 1/20/2017 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Considering all of our nation's financial problems, it sounds like a reasonable cut.

You know, in a world where America had so much surplus wealth that we could just throw money everywhere and it didn't matter, a world where everyone had a job and home and excess, I can see the value of directing taxes to funding artistic projects and all of that jazz.

But right now it does appear to be rather wasteful.

I'd like to see a lot more cuts. A lot more.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
I would recommend withholding Billions of our taxpayer dollars from countries that don't like us, first.


That's an excellent suggestion.

That's why I honestly would have rather seen a Ron Paul Admin with a Congress that would support his scheme.



posted on Jan, 20 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   
As a performing arts professional, I love this idea. To many crap artists and organizations get funding by local and federal government.
However I do not think it will happen. It's been on the chopping block for over 30 years and congress always saves it.



new topics




 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join