Doug said:
"Compared to Canada, a country similar in population size (33.4 million people), California uses about 6 billion gallons more gas and diesel.
<..." [
read]
Robert Pritchett said:
"I doubt it is crashworthy and may only allowed to be a NEV. No bumper says no go. Small tires says go-cart...." [
read]
Desiree said:
"If the fish is organic, it was probably farm raised in an controlled organic environment. Mercury tainted fish come from contaiminated ocean/lakes..." [
read]
Courtney said:
"On Morgan Spurlock's 30 days, he spent 30 days being a coal miner. One of the coal miners said the coal company is just trying to get all the coal ..." [
read]
Tim said:
"This summer, I was in Missouri for a week and a half. When the topics of gas prices came up, I mentioned plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles, an..." [
read]
I wonder what this 'art' cost taxpayers? You'd think they would have at least thrown in a few punctuation marks for the price.
Have a look at the aerial video of this 'art' -- shot from a, *cough* 'carbon neutral' helicoptor:
http://precipice-alliance.org/images/indestructible_1.mov
I wonder what this 'art' cost taxpayers?
Life in Libertarianland is so grim. Someone shows interesting art and all they can think about is the possibility that a fraction of a fraction of a penny MIGHT have been "taken" from them.
actually, taxpayers probably paid nothing for this work. having worked at a state art foundation for years, i can tell you that public art is often not at all supported by public funds. from experience i know that to produce a work of this scale, many many people must have worked very hard (probably at very low, if any, pay). this work has a very admirable intention. your demeaning quotation mark ("art") only reveal your own ignorance.
Mmmm, looks like taxpayers actually did foot the bill for this. According to New York Foundation for the Arts, the sponsoring organization, 2004/2005 financial statement (http://www.nyfa.org/files_uploaded/NYFA05audit.pdf), they recieved $257,835 from the federal government in 2005, and $377,569 in 2004. That's a fair chunk of change.
Also, "The Precipice Alliance" is a 501(c) tax exempt outfit, like a church.
So, it's pretty certain those ignorant philistine libertarians had to pay for this glorious work of ... art.
Mmmm, looks like taxpayers actually did foot the bill for this.
Still polishing your pennies? Please detail the exact amount of money that went from the federal government to this specific project. Your flailing away at the financials for the NYFA has nothing to do with your miserly paranoia.
The Precipice Alliance is a "sponsored organization" of the NYFA, which has a specific meaning, detailed here:
http://www.nyfa.org/level2.asp?id=2&fid=2
The project itself has its own sponsors, detailed here:
http://precipice-alliance.org/framepage.html
You can relax. No one is trying to steal a fraction of a fraction of a precious penny from you.
Also, "The Precipice Alliance" is a 501(c) tax exempt outfit, like a church.
And...?
And since you don't grasp how this works, it is difficult to get a 501(c)(3) designation, so oftentimes startup orgs which wish to become 501(c)(3)s oftentimes get in under a larger, established organization's "umbrella" in order to get the benefits of being a 501(c)(3) while they build up their own organization. As you can see in the details on the NYPA page, that seems to be precisely the function of the "fiscal sponsorship" program.
Here's a key part in the FAQ from that section:
"Q: Does NYFA’s Fiscal Sponsorship program provide direct funding?
A: No. The Fiscal Sponsorship program is not a grant-making program. However, having a fiscal sponsor allows an individual to apply to many funders who do not accept applications from individuals."
So much for your misdirected "analysis" of the NYPA financials. No money is going from NYPA to the Precipice Alliance, thus none of the federal money from the NYPA gets to the Precipice Alliance.
Your penny fractions are safe.
Obviously the unsophisticated lumpen-proles don't understand this work of stunning brilliance. The bourguois fools can't grasp the fact that we Artists are entitled to their money, so that we can use it to enlighten them. They should be thanking us.
Clearly, this tedious bore doesn't understand conceptual art. Like most unenlightened peasants, they don't even comprehend the meta-message behind their beloved monster truck shows and professional wrestling.
Consider the artistic elements in this piece: A giant electric neon sign installed in the windows of a trendy renovated loft development; a helicopter.
And just in case you doubt a giant neon sign and a helicopter don't spell Environmentalism, these ingredients are combined with an elaborately decorated web page, denoting 'admirable intentions'.
The obvious conclusion (obvious to those of us with the sensitivity and training to interpret conceptual art, that is), is that the theme of this ingenius installation is irony.
The joke is at your expense, boorish Joe Sixpack.
Literally.
carlos the hamster, your own attempt at well-informed irony would be more convincing if you didn't conflate the peasantry, proletariat and bourgeoisie...
I think we can agree that there are lots of different people running around who will be reached in lots of ways: some by Willie Nelson, some by Al Gore, and perhaps some driving home on the Turnpike and spying an enigmatic neon message. While it's elitist or whatever-ist to diss people for not "getting" art, it's just as discriminatory to knock people for learning a certain artistic/academic language and wanting to express themselves and reach people using it.
In terms of waste, I get an annoying amount of junk mail from environmental organizations trying to reach me through alarmist rhetoric. How many resources went into filming An Inconvenient Truth and schlepping Gore around the globe to promote it? Clearly there is a cost/benefit situation here as well, and this project has made strides to reduce energy consumption.
Our taxes have subsidized the Disney light parades. Want to get up in arms about that? I think we can give the artists a break?
The bourguois fools can't grasp the fact that we Artists are entitled to their money
Ah, so you're a troll. Got it.
Just a comment...
The issue of Global Climate Change as we know it exists and I saw this piece on the Pulaski Skyway the other evening and it immediately caught my attention, in fact while driving my car I nearly got in an accident because I recognized that it was not a slogan and the scale and visibility made me ponder what it said. IT seemed self-evident. Green has been co-opted and this used it as a referrant to money, green house gases, green as in environmental-- effectively, so effectively that I almost got into an accident. As a work of art it points in the right direction and this is all that it needs to do. I also read that it is carbon neutral AND that creates a very large and public message, and in New Jersey of all places. Look at the context people, and think, as the sign says, you must all be more intelligent than what you have revealed. With applause to the organization and the artist, someone is doing some work out there.