Hacker News Reader

Comment by np_tedious | Hacker News Reader

Covid stimulus should've funded cool stuff like this. Submit one watercolor painting per week to get that extra $600/wk federal unemployment

View on HN

We had this in The Netherlands up to 1987 for artists only : the state ended up with a humongous collection of bad/mediocre art, which was eventually sold off through eBay(!)

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeldende_Kunstenaars_Regeling ( no English )

I feel like there's an implication that convincing people to make bad/mediocre art was a somehow a letdown, but that seems like a fine outcome to me if it got people to actually make art. Making bad art is inherent in the process of making good art. As written in the BRC Weekly last year:

> We need lowbudget art to inspire budgetless fledgling artists. We need art of all kinds as an indication that this is a place of radical self-expression and participation where people realize that anyone can be an artist.

How romantic. The practice at the time was though : in order to get the benefit, one had to produce a piece once in a while, so there were deadlines.

So lots of people smashed some paint on a canvas at that point in time and called it a painting.

Others might call this a scam or embezzlement. In particular when one is paying for it.

Sure, but the alternative discussed here is handing over the money to people that haven't produced art, mediocre or otherwise. This could hardly be considered more a scam or embezzlement scheme than that system.

That’s actually a really cool idea. Like, make something. Anything. And you get paid.

I know some people would revolt against the idea that one should “have to do something to get welfare money” like it’s some sort of thumbing the nose at “welfare queens” or whatever. But no, it has a lot of very constructive benefits.

1) a person feels a sense of pride for earning money for something they created

2) they are building a portfolio of work and training themselves toward perhaps making it a meaningful career

3) we as a society may benefit by seeing some really astonishing work that we would never have discovered otherwise.

You don't need forced labor for that.

Most people did try out creative things during covid. Those that didn't aren't necessarily "rough diamonds", but likely just uninterested and unmotivated.

It's not forced labor. Your are welcome to not get paid.

Also, many people find a reason (even if arbitrary / contrived) useful for prompting creative endeavors

Sorta related, but the government of Norway will purchase ~1000 books (meeting simple criteria) written by Norwegian authors & published by Norwegian publishing houses and then distribute the books to libraries, etc.: https://www.kulturdirektoratet.no/innkjopsordningene

I think we need a bunch of peoples crappy watercolor paintings

Hey it doesn't need to be efficient when you're just throwing money around. Pay someone else to rank them and pick the best ones. Some amount of them will be good

This is such an interesting idea. Basically employ everyone receiving the stimulus as contractors to do something like this. A group of people make the paintings, a group assesses them for quality, others categorize and label. Every job is small and relatively straightforward while also giving something to show for the money!

Your low opinion of others is simply a reflection of the low esteem in which you hold yourself.

To be honest, I don't think I'm the only one who would agree that, if they hired me, the results would be crappy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com