(shoots pens that sign the contracts in midair)
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 07:24 (twelve years ago) link
my god
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 07:35 (twelve years ago) link
HOOsteen, there was a pretty big discussion above that was partly inspired by your
that said i'm p 'libertarian party' when it comes to guns― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:36 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:36 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
I got a response from milo. How bout you? Note that I'm not trying to be provocative or anything. Just curious.
― things you're secretly kinda libertranny about (beachville), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 09:45 (twelve years ago) link
In Finland there's a huge system where the state subsidizes various art institutions... While I think the idea is good in theory, in practice a disproportionate amount of the money goes to "high art" institutions, like opera and classical music orchestras, while various forms of "low art" (i.e. stuff that working class and lower middle class people enjoy) get much less. The justification for this is that without the state support many of the high art institutions would face an economical crisis and possibly go bankrupt. The most obvious example of this is the National Opera, which gets more than half of its budget from the subsidies, and much less from the actual ticket sales. While I've nothing against opera and enjoy some of that stuff myself, basically I think that if people don't want to listen to opera enough to support it, just let it die! Various art forms have born and died throughout history (sometimes to be resurrected again decades or centuries later), there's no need for them to be kept artificially alive just because the higher-class people who decide on the subsidies think some art form is more valuable than another one.
― Tuomas, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 10:19 (twelve years ago) link
there should be no traffic laws
― max, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:36 (twelve years ago) link
this is something im libertarian about
no traffic laws, no sidewalks, no parking on roads
― max, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:37 (twelve years ago) link
that sounds like a traffic law son
― plee help i am lookin for (crüt), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:38 (twelve years ago) link
its a parking law
― max, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:39 (twelve years ago) link
I'm libertarian about politics and religion, which to me means I like diversity, I don't want to turn on the television and see only people who think like me, I like to see conservative viewpoints or learn about people's religious beliefs. Some people think "libertarian" means "I hate God" or something.
― โตเกียวเหมียวเหมียว aka Trucks of my Tears (Mount Cleaners), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:49 (twelve years ago) link
I didn't know that people thought that!
― things you're secretly kinda libertranny about (beachville), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:50 (twelve years ago) link
While I've nothing against opera and enjoy some of that stuff myself, basically I think that if people don't want to listen to opera enough to support it, just let it die! Various art forms have born and died throughout history (sometimes to be resurrected again decades or centuries later), there's no need for them to be kept artificially alive just because the higher-class people who decide on the subsidies think some art form is more valuable than another one.
it's not that simple. there may be Higher Class people acting as cultural gatekeepers of art funding and there may not, but if the state subsidises culture that otherwise wdn't happen or wd be severely curtailed then it does so for the benefit of all its members. it's like saying there shd be no publically subsidised art galleries because if people care enough, they'll shell out the odd million pounds to have their own art collection.
i'd agree there are issues around the way arts are funded but state-subsidised opera exists to allow all sorts of people to enjoy it, not just dudes in top hats and monocles.
― dayove cool (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 13:05 (twelve years ago) link
if all that many wanted it it'd be sustainable without subvention is the argument.
I dunno where i stand on that tbh, i'd always kneejerk towards public money having better things to be doing than supporting sports/arts/whatever but meh gotta do something with all that phat cash i guess
abstract industrial steel sculptures in the middle of roundabouts ca do one, tho
― beware of greek bearer bonds (darraghmac), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 13:29 (twelve years ago) link
like i say i recognise that arts grants is fraught with contestible issues. but tbh all governments jizz away enough money on stuff that's actively evil that it seems curmudgeonly to moan about stuff that actually brings people pleasure
― dayove cool (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 13:39 (twelve years ago) link
arts funding is not just for the sake of promulgating culture or whatever high purposes it espouses, but also as a kind of soft (and effective) job creation scheme for a population w/o a lot of koosh
― "renegade" gnome (remy bean), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 13:40 (twelve years ago) link
There are also state prestige/display things bound up with top-end opera & ballet so they might get disproportionate money, but yeah, subsidies in uk at least for that stuff are usually tied up with affordable seats, community programmes afaict.
― woof, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 13:54 (twelve years ago) link
I'm pro-arts but in the U.S. the pro-arts position isn't articulated well. It's a fair question to ask how the U.S. in general benefits from, say, the funding of European classical programs. I think our country surely benefits from support for American cultural endeavors like jazz or folk music programs. I don't think our democracy has any substance, however, without educational programming.
― โตเกียวเหมียวเหมียว aka Trucks of my Tears (Mount Cleaners), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 13:57 (twelve years ago) link
It's a fair question to ask how the U.S. in general benefits from, say, the funding of European classical programs. I think our country surely benefits from support for American cultural endeavors like jazz or folk music programs.
this strikes me as a very strange and sort of jingoistic thing to say. people and cultures can benefit from art/the arts whether or not the work in question is entirely "homegrown".
― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:39 (twelve years ago) link
Smoking in pubs should be allowed. FFS!
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:40 (twelve years ago) link
it's interesting how many smokers seem to think that
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:41 (twelve years ago) link
Also at this stage aren't they (classical / jazz / folk) mostly "things you only do if someone's paying you to"?
― Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:45 (twelve years ago) link
yeah, living in a non-smoking country is a joy, tbph
NV- i was kind of agreeing with you on 'gotta spend it somehow, opera won't kill anyone'
― beware of greek bearer bonds (darraghmac), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:48 (twelve years ago) link
you can replace 'opera' w/ any other form of music there tho
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:55 (twelve years ago) link
I'm against funding for classical music because I hate old people
I don't see how my statement is either strange or jingoistic when the same "argument" can be found in the mission statements of many American cultural organizations. Public interest is what justifies arts funding whether it is public or private. For example, PBS support for Ken Burns. Is Ken Burns stuff jingoistic or are documentaries about jazz, Frank Lloyd Wright and Prohibition globally as well as domestically relevant?
― โตเกียวเหมียวเหมียว aka Trucks of my Tears (Mount Cleaners), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:58 (twelve years ago) link
being 'libertariany' about zoning should really go in the fascisty thread -- basically you want to remove all local power over land use in favor of a larger body or plan.
it's less land-use restrictive but very politically restrictive, if that makes sense. nimby politics are like the most ancient kind of politics.
― Critique of Pure Moods (goole), Monday, February 13, 2012 2:46 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
naw being able to do what u want on YOUR LAND w/o yr neighbors saying shit is the heart of libertarianism, of course thats not really why i want zoning relaxed, but then im not libertarian
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 14:58 (twelve years ago) link
Question: if the majority of pub patrons wanted pubs to be non-smoking, why didn't enterprising landlords open hugely successful no-smoking pubs before the smoking ban came into play?
(i actually quite like my little walks outside to meet new and interesting and cool people who smoke tbh but still)
― dayove cool (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:00 (twelve years ago) link
because large groups of people are likely to have at least one smoker who's gonna bitch about it
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:01 (twelve years ago) link
plus it wouldn't be as 'cool' as the other bars
it's like they had a non-smoking casino in vegas, it went nowhere, but everyone can agree that casinos in vegas are the most disgusting smelling thing in the universe. still, nobody wants to party in the mormon casino.
people who smoke are cool by default.
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:02 (twelve years ago) link
smoking is bad for you
― max, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:02 (twelve years ago) link
people didnt realize how much they liked it until after the law was in effect
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:02 (twelve years ago) link
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:40 AM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― iatee, Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:41 AM (21 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
i am a nonsmoker, and i think smoking in bars should be legal, so long as there are dedicated, well-ventilated spaces for it. along with dedicated, well-ventilated spaces for nonsmokers.
― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:06 (twelve years ago) link
actually I'd prefer if they had to do it in a small enclosed room
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:06 (twelve years ago) link
o you don't like the smoke I thought you liked smoke
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:07 (twelve years ago) link
the fascist thread is over there btw
― dayove cool (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:07 (twelve years ago) link
this is the libertarian thread I do what I want
they can smoke but they have to keep all the smoke inside them until theyre outside
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:08 (twelve years ago) link
Vaguely remember an article from like 10 years ago about how the problem with getting kids not to start smoking isn't that "smoking" is cool, it's that SMOKERS are cool (or "cool" to 12yos or w/e).
― one little aioli (Laurel), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:08 (twelve years ago) link
it's cos we just don't care
― dayove cool (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:08 (twelve years ago) link
All smokers have to wear 1950s-style bubble space helmets all the time and their car windows are locked permanently in the "up" position.
― The Large Hardon Collider (Phil D.), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:09 (twelve years ago) link
not giving a fuck isnt cool you know whats cool listening to the government
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:09 (twelve years ago) link
dunno if you guys knew this but smoking is bad for you, and for the people who are around you when youre smoking
― max, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:10 (twelve years ago) link
The smoking ban has ruined fun in our town - especially music venues. As a promoter, it's basically impossible to keep a room full because everyone's outside smoking, and even the non-smokers stand outside with their mates. So between acts the place is basically empty, this ruins the atmosphere and then people stop coming to live shows because all they do is stand outside, so it's not worth the cost of the ticket. Most of the venues and pubs don't even have the means to create comfortable smoking areas so smoking queues just spill out all over the shop creating excessive litter, extraneous noise, not to mention an inconvenience for people trying to get past. There was a noticeable number of pubs and venues that had to close or have their live music license revoked within a year or so of the smoking ban.
Plus, for fuck's sake - pubs are supposed to be dens of sin. You should be able to smoke in them.
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:10 (twelve years ago) link
sounds like a lot of people in england should quit smoking then
― iatee, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:11 (twelve years ago) link
put the bands outside problem solved
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:11 (twelve years ago) link
i am a nonsmoker, and i think smoking in bars should be legal, so long as there are dedicated, well-ventilated spaces for it. along with dedicated, well-ventilated spaces for nonsmokers.― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:06 (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:06 (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
This.
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:11 (twelve years ago) link
people stop coming to live shows because all they do is stand outside, so it's not worth the cost of the ticket.
do these people understand what a live show is?
― ledge, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:11 (twelve years ago) link
lag∞n, you've never been to the uk huh?
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 15:12 (twelve years ago) link