Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

New Weekly Basic Income for Artists

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,769 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    I dunno — we do punch well above our weight when it comes to literature, and lots of people who are not Irish are well aware of that. Not least because we write largely in English, Irish literature has a wider reach and acheives wider recognition that it otherwise might. But there's more going on than that. Other anglophone countries with a population roughtly comparable in size to ours would be e.g. New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Scotland. Have any of them produced literary figures with the stature and global recognition of, say, James Joyce, Samuel Beckett, WB Yeats? Would any have as many Nobel Prizes in literature as Ireland has?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,694 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,355 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Let's take that at face value. Maybe it then becomes a reason to try something like this.

    You subsidise something that needs to be subsidised, rather than something that doesn't need to be.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,724 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    And if you were talking to a person who is passionate about literature, we'd absolutely be in the top 5 countries of many and the positioning would largely down to personal preference. Joyce or Wilde tend to end up ranked alongside Tolstoy and Faulkner. We're basically top tier in terms of greatest authors of time. Contemporary we've got the likes of Sebastian Barry, Colm Toibin, John Banville, Sally Rooney, Colm McCann and Joseph O'Connor. And I'm omitting loads of names. They're all superb writers and plenty of them very much so rank in current greatest living authors.

    I forgot to mention our poets, Yeats, Boland, Kavanagh and Heaney. So ya that's a pretty extensive list of literary Irish talent that the globe is very much so aware of. If you like to read anyway and I'm not talking about basic popular fiction .



  • Registered Users Posts: 137 ✭✭TagoMago


    The Arts Festival (with Macnas and the Druid are very important to) is of huge benefit to Galway, it brings in huge tourist numbers and massive amounts of money every year. This philistine attitude of the arts just being scroungers looking for handouts is total nonsense. Live music, theatre, etc. generate a lot of revenue and are important for tourism. Just because you dislike something doesn't mean there aren't loads of people that do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 137 ✭✭TagoMago


    …..



  • Registered Users Posts: 137 ✭✭TagoMago


    In most English speaking countries I'd say they would (for writers anyway)



  • Registered Users Posts: 578 ✭✭✭Hungry Burger




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,355 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    just for the laugh, i found a list of the 100 best novels in the english language (which will be completely subjective, of course, but interesting to look at the numbers).

    six of the authors listed are irish (swift, joyce, beckett, wilde, o'brien, and mcgahern). given that the pool of authors comes from the UK, ireland, the states, etc., that's a decent showing. we constitute maybe 1 to 2% of the english speaking world, so a 6% showing in a list like that is unlikely to be matched by any other country.

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/aug/17/the-100-best-novels-written-in-english-the-full-list



  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭MeisterG


    Not that I have skin in this fight particularly but Scotland must be comparable - Conan Doyle, Louis Stevension,Scott, Burns



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,769 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Not to be offensive, but no. No harm to Conan Doyle or RL Stevenson or even Robbie Burns, but no court in world literature is going to put them on a par, in terms of their importance to literary history, with the likes of Yeats, Beckett or Joyce.



  • Registered Users Posts: 92 ✭✭walkonby


    Scotland punches above its weight in intellectual history (Smith, Hume, Nesbitt) so its version should be a weekly basic income for thinkers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,808 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    A type not rated highly, in this country, sadly. Patrick Hederman, Glenstal Abbey, being my nomination for that art.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,385 ✭✭✭Jack Daw


    Conan Doyle and Stevenson are still being widely read today by the masses and will continue to be widely read by the masses probably for centuries.

    I think popular fiction that lasts through the centuries is probably the most important form of literature precisely because it appeals to the masses as more people are impacted by it.Joyce and Beckett may be more stylistic important , more studied , have more critical acclaim etc but honestly how many people actually read their works, whereas everybody in the world knows Treasure Island and Sherlock Holmes.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,355 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    People know Sherlock Holmes - how many have read any of the books though?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,073 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    hope this program spreads to other areas in our society, it just makes sense, it directly helps those that need it, and the businesses that ultimately receive it, hence helps towards job creation, and then of course the circulation of money via taxation, i.e. everyone wins…..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,290 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Ironically Galway's literal place on the map is what put it on the map. It has little competition as a major investment hub or education centre and it being on the West coast and being "the gateway to Connemara" has made it the spot every Yank wants to pretend he his from. Even before that it was a tourist destination and that more than anything put Galway on the map. It's massively overrated as a centre for the arts.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,694 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    Yet look at the crowds the film fleadh, Galway arts festival, Babaro etc bring in.

    It completely punches above it's weight when it comes to the arts (with the likes of Macnas and Druid) when you look at the level of funding Galway receives. As I've said before, Galway doesn't even have a dedicated rehearsal room.



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    I assume you're joking,

    Robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't how you create jobs.

    Leaving money in tax payers pockets allows tax payers to spend more of their money on things they want.

    The Irish state is a monster that has created enough voting constituencies with tax payers money to ensure that the monster will only get bigger and bigger. All at the expense of people who actually generate revenue, jobs and income for society.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,694 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    There's many papers that back up the argument. People spend more if they have a regular income, this increasing the VAT receipts. All income earned above the basic income is taxable as well.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,355 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    If you want to boost the economy by boosting spending, you get the money to the poorest in society. Because they don't have the luxury of saving.



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    A minimum wage job would provide more income than this hairbrained scheme.

    Also, by that logic, make the dole a grand a week. The economy would be flying!





  • They wouldn't even need to be in Ireland to get this pay, they could be on a beach in the Canneries living the good life, compared to us saps who have to work for it.





  • There's always exceptions but generally artists do their best work in their twenties, I was never into art like paintings, galleries. But in music it's something I have noticed, plus young people set and follow current trends better. Personally I would set it to 18 to 35 age range. If an artist is not established by then the odds of success are low. The reason they should make public the artists involved, as you can see more clearly their intentions and if the artists are deserving of it, if they are doing original work (not AI) because you and I know, the government are bad at this or they might decide to give the money to their relation down the road. It would bring oversight and transparency. Yes diversity quotas can be ok but are they excessive in one area, or are they promoting some artists because it promotes a certain image the government want like the recent Eurovision selection.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,808 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    So we now put forward the theory that the Govn't selected Bambie Thug to represent Ireland😂

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,073 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …and again, those lower on the socioeconomic scale tend to spend most of what they have, this directly benefits them and the businesses that receive this money, those higher on the scale tend to use more of their money purchasing assets such as property, which only truly benefits those markets, by helping to inflate the price of such assets…..



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    What's your point exactly?

    Up to a certain point, as incomes increase consumption increases. After that people tend to spend their OWN money on assets, such as a pension. Do you think you should be able to dictate how people spend their money?

    As a society we offer an unbelievable amount of support for people to up skill. People have numerous opportunities to better themselves in Ireland. At the state's expense. Which I approve of by the way. It's to everyone's benefit when people improve their skills.

    However, every transfer payment that the government gives creates a disincentive to work. And as we've seen in Ireland there's a significant cohort who are happy not to work.

    Also, why are so many hard work tax payers happy to see their money thrown at the undeserving?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,808 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    We're back to the old 'moral hazard' argument. We definitely shouldn't have rescues the developers and banks, AIB twice. Anyone not repaying any loan and interest to the full, should be sent to a debtors prison.



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    Or maybe they could get another job if they can't earn enough in their current one.

    Why should the tax payer be on the hook just because someone can't earn a crust with their art?

    If you were being asked to directly pay 300 odd euro a week to someone you'd be fairly quick to say no. But once it's "taxpayers' money" all of a sudden it's fine to waste it.

    Edit:

    Also, 40 hours a week of work leaves plenty of time for a hobby. Ask anyone who's studied part time while working.



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    The bailout is a different conversation.

    On the topic of debtors' prison:

    They're a stupid idea in this day and age. Repossess the house. Allow the individual to declare bankruptcy and let them move on with their lives.

    The situation in Ireland where it's nearly impossible to repossess a house is ridiculous. And it leads to tax payers paying the highest mortgage interest rates in Europe.

    Over the course of a mortgage that is tens of thousands of Euro. If not hundreds of thousands. But you know, screw the tax payer, he should just bend over so the free loaders can have a good ride.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,023 ✭✭✭randd1


    Or plays/coaches sports.

    Or enjoys going to the cinema.

    Or the simple joy of walking the dog for an hour.

    Some people love cooking.

    Some people play computer games/watch TV in their spare time.

    People don’t get paid for their hobbies. And there’s nothing to stop you doing art when you’re on the dole.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,694 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    The dole used to be described as the artists subsidy. Can't do that anymore now everyone needs to be "activated"

    Do you, or do you not think art and culture is important to a life lived?



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    Of course it's important.

    We're discussing how it should be funded.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,023 ✭✭✭randd1


    Of course it’s important.

    But is it any more important than a lad coaching young people 2/3 times a week in various sports, not withstanding the benefit society gets from having children active and not obese?

    Theres a local man, retired, who got together a group other retirees and spend their free days cutting grass, tending to flower beds, cleaning up the local graveyard, things like that. You’d often see them with their grandkids doing some as well. All off their own bat, and expense (though the community has started a regular little collection for the old folks annual trip). Is it more important than something like that?

    Not for me.



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    Fair play to those lads giving to the community.

    It shows a real love of a place when residents are willing to give their time like that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,023 ✭✭✭randd1


    Yeah, the main lad over it, he has only a very small house, looks incredible. Some of the flower beds near the church are just lovely, some arrangement of colours.

    It’s the simple things really that have the greatest effect, and there’s nothing more simple than a bit of nature, whatever its form.

    Great for the older folks too that they meet up more regularly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,694 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    So all those people could be on 350pw on a basic income, giving them more time to devote to these interests. I mean that would depend on this trial being a success (which is what it's looking like) and getting more people on board (which is the challenge).

    Great.

    If it's important, it has to be paid for. You can't just pay the "successful" artists as

    A: you'll run out of artists as the young ones have to give it up, and get a job unless their parents are loaded. The artists that come late to the game wouldn't be able to take the financial risk of going for it either.

    B: You run the risk of underrepresented artists from working class areas (which is already happening) as money is such an issue to them.

    C: Basic income is taxable income, so anything they earn over it is taxed straight away. They'll also be spending their 350 on rent (taxable) supplies (taxable) workshops (taxable).

    I think we have to wait to see exactly how much what the net cost to this scheme will be before we can judge that. (350pw Vs how much the govt received back).

    The problem with that is, where do you stop? The playwright on 350 a week writes a play and receives €7,000 for it, which they're taxed on. Then it's put on stage, actors, backstage support, sets, costumes, lights etc are all paid (and pay tax) and the audience (potentially thousands) buys tickets and have a meal before going in and having a drink at the bar, before getting a taxi home (all adding to the states coffers).

    But all we'll see is the tax take on 7000 vs 350pw.

    Would the playwright have written that play without the safety blanket of 350pw? Maybe, but it might not have been crafted as well due to having to hold down another job.

    It's the basic problem with trying to justify art in a financial sense. It's finance Vs intangibles.

    Post edited by Flaneur OBrien on


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,355 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    there's only one of those you've listed which would be comparable with creating art; coaching sports. as in, it's the only 'hobby' you've listed where anyone other than the person practicing the hobby benefits.

    for example, playing video games, you're a consumer. not a creator.

    as mentioned, the grant to the greyhound racing industry costs more per annum than this scheme has, and i don't think you could make a case that greyhound racing benefits society as much as supporting the arts does.

    (FWIW - it needs to be mentioned that this scheme is certainly not the only money given to the arts in ireland!)



  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    I'd argue that he'd write a better play without basic income because he would have some life experience from working.

    He might be able to relate to those people sitting in the audience, who've spent their hard earned on a ticket.

    I doubt Orwell's books would have been improved (or even existed) had he been a life long doler.

    Also, any money spent is good for the economy. However, an economy cannot sustain unlimited transfer payments. Someone has to actually do some work to pay for everything!

    This "wouldn't it be nice" scenario where other people's money is given to people to fund their hobbies is the typical rubbish we come up with in Ireland. Because we haven't yet figured out that the government can only spend our money, and a significant portion of society lives on the backs of others.

    People would have more money to spend on art if the government taxed them less. And, people would be free to fund the art they like, not have their taxes used to fund all sorts of rubbish.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,694 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    You'd be right if it wasn't for automation removing many jobs.

    Fact is, that's already happened. Companies aren't paying as much tax/employers PRSI etc as they used to.

    One of the things that needs to be discussed is that we need to increase the tax intake by taxing companies fairly. It's unfair for them to withold profits which should have been money for the exchequer from employing less people



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 144 ✭✭Mick ah


    Productivity increases are what pay for wage increases.

    If you start discouraging companies from investing in technology then we'll just fall behind the competition. Employment levels will change as new technology emerges. But one thing is for certain, the idea that AI will replace everyone is laughable.

    Also in Ireland, what is "fair" when it comes to taxing companies. We don't have a big capital base to tax. The golden geese that are currently paying for our bloated public sector and society's "most vulnerable" will up sticks in the morning if the tax regime here becomes unfavorable. Don't ever forget that. Our prosperity depends entirely on allowing foreign companies access to the EU while offering the benefits of being in a tax haven.



Advertisement