That isn't libertarian. If you were a libertarian you wouldn't be outraged that your tax dollars are supporting museums in the form of a grant.

*would be* outraged

Good point, YJ. What would I be, then, if I just said, "For fuck's sake, just find the good ideas and fund them!"

(I was going for the "Good God, the government can't do anything right. If we have to fund this stuff, can't we just give the money to a private foundation and let them make the decisions?" angle. Private foundations are always easier to work with for funding, and generally get better outcomes.)

privatize everything

Why do people such as yourself Hecks - (like you, not necessarily you) - who have given their lives over to historical preservation - think that the government is necessary to preserve historical stuff, as opposed to private money?

In other words, *you* think it is important, but you apparently don't have enough faith in anybody else to think it's important enough to fund it privately, so you think it has to be forced funding through taxation and subsequent begging from the Feds, who no doubt will then tie many little strings to your money...

...its' the same as racism, really. "Oh, I'm enlightened enough to not do/say xyz and to hire the little people without descriminating....but everyone else is a slobbering boob will must do wrong and evil things unless I come down upon them with my hammer. I'm enlightened...everyone else is a boob...."

....and yet when you say, "....I'll hire the little people..." you are actively discriminating, and being a color-conscience person, as opposed to color blind...

....and somehow this is analogous to something pertaining to forcing me to fund the arts....but I'll just wait and see if you can figure it out.

@Krellin,
"Why do people such as yourself Hecks - (like you, not necessarily you) - who have given their lives over to historical preservation - think that the government is necessary to preserve historical stuff, as opposed to private money?"

Yeah, no, that's a good point. If it were me, I wouldn't be going after this money. Unlike a lot of (perhaps most) other museums, we don't apply for any government money (federal, state, or local) for our annual operations. Once every five years or so, we ask for a chunk of money for a specific capital project. Of the half-a-million I raise every year for operations, none comes from government sources.

But, to be honest, we've had much better results with private money. Individuals and private foundations who value our work. They're willing to trust us with their money without making a lot of specific demands because they've seen that we do good work. That flexibility lets us be better at, and in most cases more cost effective in the kind of work we do.

Government grants generally come with a lot more strings attached (you can fund this kind of publication but not that kind, you can hire this person as a consultant but not that person, etc etc etc), Government money come in big chunks, but makes generally makes museums slower, less innovative, more complacent, and often less responsive to the community's needs. Most museums would be well-advised to pass it up, especially given the amount of time you have to spend on compliance.

You're so danged reasonable hecks...lol Are you sure you're a liberal?

I think government funding hurts in the long run -- look at NPR for example -- most conservatives would be hesitant to donate to it, because they know it receives government funding and they aren't going to "pay twice", when in reality their government funding is miniscule. Imagine if they didn't alienate 50% of the potential donor base...

Yeah. I always make a point of telling people (especially Conservative-seeming visitors) that we get no operating income from government sources. In fact, I often tell people that if the government had had their way, we wouldn't even be here. Our museum is an incredibly well-preserved historic house from the 1850s. Its owner went bankrupt and got foreclosed in the Great Depression and the bank couldn't sell it. In 1940 the city slated it for demolition on unpaid taxes. It would have been razed if a group of concerned citizens hadn't raised the money to buy the abandoned property from the city.

Dang hecks -- I still can't believe that you've never been to Greenfield Village / Henry Ford Museum...that's totally up your ally.

Yeah... I know I should. But believe it or not, I've never traveled West of Buffalo. Someday I'll get there.

I suppose the east coast has enough history to keep you occupied.

Just a point of note: NPR doesn't receive any money directly from the Fed. A very small percentage of their operating budget is from federal grants which are available to anyone (I believe).

hecks - "Good point, YJ. What would I be, then, if I just said, "For fuck's sake, just find the good ideas and fund them!" "

A venture capitalist.

Why all the labels anyway?

https://medium.com/the-nib/35aa5abf79da

You think privatized entities aren't bureaucratic?

*Chuckles*

Libertarianism is an infantile disorder.

I live in Russia, and recently my company was in the process of turning some wasteland into a manufacturing facility. The government was on board, but then we hit a snag: the deed to the land said that the property was zoned "for the construction of a production facility."

So far, so good, we thought. Now we just need to take it over to the city planner's office to get the deed signed over. Got a document from them stating that the land was approved for "a production facility."

Sweet. Now we just take it to get the deed registered. "Not so fast," says the register of deeds. What was the problem, you ask? One document says that the property can be used for "the construction of a production facility" and the other says that it can be used for "a production facility." Now we have to wait 10 business days for the planning document to be redone so that they match.

*face palm*

In Soviet Russia, red tape cuts through you! :-)

But seriously, sound like bureaucrats are the same everywhere.