recentpopularlog in

jerryking : subsidies   10

Opinion | How the Superrich Took Over the Museum World
Dec. 14, 2019 | The New York Times | by Michael Massing, the author, most recently, of “Fatal Discord: Erasmus, Luther and the Fight for the Western Mind.”

The wealthy have always influenced the art scene. But in recent years, in an age of mounting anger over income inequality, they've come to dominate it......
Of MoMA's 51 trustees who vote, 45 work in finance, the corporate world, real estate or law, or are the heirs or spouses of the superrich.....both MoMA and the Met expect wealthy newcomers to their board of trustees to donate millions of dollars as the price of membership..........Art has always depended on wealthy patrons; see the Medicis, Frick and Morgan. In contrast to Europe, where museums receive significant (though now decreasing) state funding, most American museums rely heavily on private donors. .............Many of MoMA’s trustees are devoted collectors of modern and contemporary art, and the museum has benefited accordingly....... with trustees funding or donating to the museum various artistic works.......Yet dependence on the kindness of billionaires comes at a price. Today’s museum world is steeply hierarchical, mirroring the inequality in society at large........MoMA's curators seem very well paid; people in more junior positions much less so........Among the biggest losers in the current system are artists themselves. With art now considered an asset class similar to equities and commodities, collectors are forever on the lookout for rising stars whose work can be bought at bargain prices and then resold for many multiples as their reputation soars. When the market moves on, careers are often shattered (except in the case of a few ever-in-demand stars)......And even those artists who do remain popular usually benefit only from the initial sale of their work; as its value appreciates, the profits go mainly to collectors and auction houses. Museum trustees have ready access to curators and gallery owners who can point out emerging artists whose work they can buy at an early stage and benefit as the demand for it grows.......the most serious concern raised about baronial boards is the possible constraints they place on what museums can exhibit......For example, Why is there not more art inspired by such urgent matters as income inequality, deindustrialization or the rise of populism. Or why was there not more art inspired by the impact of Wall Street on Main Street or the continuing fallout from the 2008 financial crisis — the root of so much unrest in the world today?...... trustees have no decision-making role in its exhibitions, which are determined solely by the museum’s “strong curatorial staff” in regular consultation with artists....Yet a board’s influence need not be overt to be profound; curators are no doubt savvy enough to know how far they can go in challenging a system of which their trustees are such pillars.....For the superwealthy, membership on museum boards brings many benefits, including an increase in social status, access to other powerful people and an enhancement of one’s image.
Is there an alternative to the current system?
An obvious one would be to substantially increase public funding for the arts in general, and museums in particular......In 2018, MoMA received a paltry $22,000 in government funds (from New York City), compared with the $136 million it got from private sources. In fact, MoMA does not seek or receive federal or state funding. But MoMA in fact gets substantial public support through the tax write-offs its wealthy donors receive as well as its own nonprofit status. The public is in effect subsidizing the museum without getting any corresponding say in its governance.
In return for nonprofit status, the government could require MoMA and other museums to allocate a certain portion of board spots to people whose lives are not devoted to making money. The presence of art critics, historians, architects and nonprofit leaders could force museums to consider a much broader array of viewpoints.....As for more direct public funding of museums, this might seem a long shot in modern-day America, but the current political moment has created new opportunities. If taxes on the rich were raised, which most Democratic presidential candidates support, more public funds could be earmarked for museums — and for libraries, performing arts centers and other cultural institutions. 
Accomplisher_Class  art  artists  asset_classes  boards_&_directors_&_governance  collectors  contemporary_art  cultural_institutions  culture  curators  high_net_worth  income_inequality  intellectual_diversity  Manhattan  moguls  MoMA  museums  New_York_City  overachievers  patronage  patrons  performing_arts  philanthropy  public_funding  subsidies  tax-deductible  The_One_Percent 
december 2019 by jerryking
Thanks to a billionaire, Detroit is new and improved – but for whom?
November 18, 2019 | The Globe and Mail | by ADRIAN MORROW, U.S. CORRESPONDENT

Detroit's urban renaissance has also drawn tough criticism. For one, Quicken and Bedrock are accused of building an affluent island in the centre of a low-income city. While Dan Gilbert’s spending has revitalized the central business district, much of Detroit remains economically distressed with neighbourhoods full of boarded-up businesses and burnt-out houses. Detroit’s racial divides factor in, too: Recent developments have tended to concentrate in the whiter neighbourhoods of a city where 79 per cent of the population is black. For another, Bedrock and its related companies have received US$767-million worth of government subsidies and tax breaks since 2010. To some, this is an egregious use of funds when Detroit’s schools and transit system are struggling. Mr. Gilbert’s critics argue a man with a net worth Forbes estimates at US$6.8-billion has no need for government assistance.
Whether Mr. Gilbert is the hero Detroit needed to pull it back from the precipice or an unaccountable billionaire wielding an uncomfortable amount of civic power, his rise represents an extraordinary moment in U.S. urbanism. The rapid rebirth and future of one of the country’s greatest and most troubled cities rests largely in the hands of one man and his corporate empire, which is both animating the metropolis with its workforce, and directly shaping the look and feel of its streets and buildings........the subsidies have been “necessary,” but the city and state have done too little to extract benefits such as affordable housing and heritage preservation in exchange. Rather than a divide between downtown and neighbourhoods, or Mr. Gilbert and community bootstrappers, she argued, all of these elements have to work together.
anchor_tenants  Dan_Gilbert  decline  Detroit  downtown_core  gentrification  hollowing_out  income_inequality  moguls  property_development  Quicken_Loans   racial_disparities  refurbished  rejuvenation  revivals  subsidies  tax_subsidies  urban_renaissance  urban_renewal  white-collar 
november 2019 by jerryking
Venture Communism: How China Is Building a Start-Up Boom - The New York Times
By MICHAEL SCHUMANSEPT. 3, 2016
Continue reading the main storyShare This Page
Share
Tweet
Email
More
subsidies  China  start_ups  industrial_policies  entrepreneurship  incubators  cities 
september 2016 by jerryking
The growing problem: Canada slips from agricultural superpower status - The Globe and Mail
Nov. 23, 2010 | Globe and Mail | PAUL WALDIE.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture recently launched an effort to develop a national food strategy. About two dozen organizations representing farmers and food processors have joined so far, and the CFA is hoping to get consumer groups and government officials involved. The objective is to develop a long-term plan for the whole system – from field to table – by modernizing regulations, driving innovation and ensuring Canadian products are the preferred choice in international markets.

Neil Currie, general manager of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture,
subsidies  farming  Canada  industrial_policies  supply_chains  agribusiness  Paul_Waldie 
april 2011 by jerryking
Canada, a nation given to fanciful flights from reality - The Globe and Mail
May. 25, 2009 | Globe and Mail | Daniel F. Muzyka. Lays out
his "realities" for dealing with Canada's political-economic challenges.
(1) Business creates wealth, government redistributes it. (2) Markets are a powerful force. (3) Capital moves. (4) Risk has two sides. humans have all kinds of decision biases around risk. We need to recognize that there may be a "risk/return" relationship in that the average expectation is to realize a certain return given a level of riskiness in our investments. However, there are no guarantees. (5) Structural problems are just
that. If we don't deal with problems because they just aren't painful enough in better times, they will come back to haunt us in the next downturn - only worse. (6) Externalities come back to haunt. (7) Subsidies are bad and
become addictive. (8) Bailouts are no free lunch. (9) It is what you negotiate and what you are worth. Add enough value to justify your wage rates (10) Value added and productivity are the keys to success....Create more value than others and do it more productively...govts. that provide social, health and educational services should be asking questions about how productive their service delivery is, not just how much they are investing in it. (11) Innovate or wither. Propping up what exists - or worse, what existed - for the sake of maintaining the status quo, especially with subsidies, is a road to defeat....focus on research and innovation,
bailouts  Canada  Canadians  capital_flows  delusions  Daniel_Muzyka  externalities  hard_truths  innovation  interconnections  negotiations  productivity  realities  regulations  risks  rules_of_the_game  self-worth  subsidies  value_added  wishful_thinking 
may 2009 by jerryking
William Tucker: Carbon Limits, Yes; Energy Subsidies, No - WSJ.com
Tucker argues against allowing the proceeds of an emissions tax to be used to subsidize various forms of renewable energy.
energy  carbon  nuclear  subsidies 
january 2009 by jerryking

Copy this bookmark:





to read