Hacker News Reader

Could we please cite some facts in this mounting tirade against public funding of the Arts?

To what extent are facts necessary? Public funding of the arts is in a large part a philosophical issue. Either you believe that it should be done or you don't. That's primarily a question of what you think the role of government should be.

It's only if you agree that public funding of art is a good thing that then facts can come into play. What is the best, most effective way of doing it?

The criteria the NEA uses for funding work is unusually absent from this discussion.

And the comparative question, are differences in the results between kickstarter and the NEA significant? If so, are the NEA's results valuable?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com