Why would government subsidize any art form is a question that always boggles the mind. The free market should dictate what or what not the individual should spend his money on. Endowments are charity for artists who can’t make a living off their art form. When someone says they’re getting money from the government via grant or what ever you want to call it they aren’t. Government produces nothing. In actuality they are getting money from the taxpayer who may not give a rat’s behind about the form of art their hard earned money is going to. I say if you can’t make a living off that form of art then get a job that guarantees an income. No one should be allowed to be given money they have not earned to better their lifestyle in the arts or to send them around the world to show that art most especially today in the easy access of the internet.

Chris, this is not a black and white issue. If one wants to play the libertarian card, then yes, governments should not fund arts at all. But then, they shouldn't fund the military industry, or give churches tax credits. By the same token, all Olympic efforts should also be stopped, as they really benefit but the athlete, his family and his trainers. Besides a patriotic ego boost, it's useless to most voters.

On the other hand, without arts funding by governments, there wouldn't be a Sistine Chapel in Rome, and little classical music.

Few would argue today that Michelangelo or Mozart's work have not benefited the world on a grand scale and that we would be better off without the artistic and musical creations they left behind.

In the case of comic book publishers, should say, Drawn & Quarterly be given a boost by the Canadian Government, when a comparative American publisher, Topshelf has to be totally reliant on its own resources, or on private money?

Another issue, is should the Government only fund new companies and let those who have been in existence for several years, take care of themselves? Shouldn't they be financially independent by now?

There is no clear cut answer to this and I'm not sure the traditional left/right debate is suitable to answer this question.

A government’s military is a benefit to every citizen. I denounce that point as a major function of government is to sustain and secure the borders of what they are governing over. The last time I checked no one was in mortal danger if someone didn’t paint a picture or composes a piece of music.

I totally agree your point about the church. Their free ride needs to end also. They should pay the admission price just like everyone else. There’s a superstition that has outlasted its time.

I agree with you again! The Olympics are games. Games should not be sponsored by government. Again, the monies for this should come from the people who would pay to watch these games.

And the government shouldn’t fund any companies. In a free market the companies fund themselves while government takes care of security of their nation, making and implementing laws, and paving our streets. Government shouldn’t be helping new or old companies. That is the consumer dollar’s job. Free enterprise baby. If the consumer wants it they'll pay for it instead of forcing it on them with their hard earned tax dollars.

Chris, noticed I didn't say - the military - I said the military industry - two different things. One is part of the government, the other gets handouts for the government to make stuff that is very expensive and offers little direct benefits, i.e., NASA.

But you circumvented the comments about the Sistine Chapel and Mozart. If you ever go to Italy, you'll be quite happy, I'm sure to take a picture with your wife in front of the statue of David.

If you go to Greece, you'll be quite happy to walk in the remnants of the Acropolis. If you go to Egypt, you'll be happy to film the great pyramids and go near the Sphinx. Well, as a tourist, if you enjoy these, you'll have to accept that these were all government sponsored projects which might have seem trivial and useless for the commoner at the time, yet, we value these as world treasures today.

The free market rarely cares for projects of such great means and costs that will last centuries. So before you dismiss government-sponsored arts, think about all the world would not have, if all was left to the free market.

Then if you are throwing out an example like NASA then I must indicate this is another waist of tax payer money. Private enterprise is the best, logical step towards exploring what is out there. If rich people want to spend their money to explore space then go for it Trump.

BIG DEAL! We landed on the moon, we are building (or built depending on how you want to look at it) an international space station, but we don’t even know how to treat each other here down and Earth. So we are going to take our prejudices and stupidity to space? Of course that is a whole other debate and one not to be discussed on this particular thread.

As far as the Sistine Chapel and Mozart or this David statue dude. I could care less. Call me uncultured. Call me unsophisticated. Is it you to tell me what I should love about culture or art or monuments? And who is to say what culture is and what is crap? The all mighty dollar, baby! It’s what someone will pay to see this so called culture and these things. And they are only that. They are only things. You may deem them significant, but perhaps others don’t. I don’t deem them as world treasures. To me they are a place to go when you are bored, want somewhere to go, and want something to look at. Again – they are things. You may argue they are our history. NO! They are things…very old things sitting for centuries not saying a word. And what has the world learned from these things. Not a thing. Human nature will never learn from them. Again – whole other argument.

And then you are comparing the Sphinx to money for travel to pump someone’s comic books or other crappy art. Perhaps it is the feces on the Virgin Mary or wrapping trees in paper. For this article let’s stick to comic books. AGAIN! No tax payer money deserves their attention. They are only comic books. Alan Moore (as an example) is not a genius. He didn’t split the atom, find an alternative fuel source, or unite the world as one. He wrote some freakin’ comic book stories. He may be a great story teller, but neither he nor any other comic book creator deserves a free trip anywhere from taxpayer money.

This is the problem with my country and your country sir and I guess the world as a whole. Everyone is looking for a free ride in the name of something. BUT! There are those who refuse a free ride and wish to get to success on their own merits. WOW! People actually want to get somewhere on their own. The biggest, absolute answer is will the mass population pat a dollar or two to see a movie, or a piece of art, or the Sphinx. To me that is the baseline of art. Look at the Oscars every year. The one’s that win an Oscar is never the movies everyone goes to…the Oscars are voted on by a small group of people telling the rest of the world what is good and what is not.