Share.

    13 commenti

    1. gowangowangowan on

      Was there an analysis done to see if the artists who benefited from the scheme actually had a different outcome to others than who didn’t?

    2. FeistyPromise6576 on

      bit of a biased sample size, particularly when it comes to the amount paid and duration which should have been broken out between artists(current and prospective recipients) and general public responses. I think the median length of 5 years of support is pretty reasonable, if you cant make it after 5 years of public support then its probably fair to give someone else a shot.

    3. That is not a robust way of finding the actual levels of support for the scheme. I’ve no view on the scheme myself but that’s not an unbiased sample.

    4. lisagrimm on

      It gets a bit lost in the details, but it’s worth knowing that the scheme hasn’t even been strictly for ‘arts’ as such – have friends doing humanities research who are part of it, and they have been able to write books, do all sorts of interesting related things as a result. There’s a lot of cool stuff out there in the world now that might not have been otherwise; hope it gets expanded.

    5. Sabreline12 on

      Hmm, 97% of people who made the effort to respond to a specific survey, half of which being artists, were supportive.

      Yes, defintiely representative of general opinion..

    6. Historical-Dance3748 on

      >Responses also varied on how long artists should receive the payment: the average suggested duration was 12 years, while the median response was 5 years.

      Sounds like poor survey design, I wonder was there an option to input whatever you like and one mad bastard went with 1,000,000 years.

    7. gnomeplanet on

      We already have income support that will top up your earnings to a minimum level.

    8. daheff_irl on

      17k respondents is a sizeable response. but how many of them are already in the arts and would benefit from this?

      Kinda like Santa voting for Christmas (its not too early)

    9. WobbldySausage on

      Its no good if everyone can’t use it. I do my art in my spare time. If you want me to quit my job and say its my main job, ill so it

    10. TheChrisD on

      I thought we already knew this, but that was the cost-benefit analysis reported on two weeks ago — [https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/1noihvh/basic_income_for_the_arts_pilot_generated_over/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/1noihvh/basic_income_for_the_arts_pilot_generated_over/)

      >Regarding the payment amount, just over 50% of respondents said the current level is “about right,” while 44% believe it is too low.

      Wait until the respondents find out how much less the payments for the elderly and the disabled are…

    11. HongKongChicken on

      People will really moan about anything. Arts and culture is a hugely important part of this country. I would be more than happy to see my taxes going to people who are actively trying to make a career out of artistry. And you need to meet certain criteria that shows you’re active in the arts, I don’t imagine it is an easy system to game.

      It has recently become common for only young people from wealthier backgrounds to be able to pursue the arts full-time into adulthood because of the financial safety nets provided by their families. That’s perfectly fine, and they are entitled to do that, but a scheme like this would enable a much larger cross-section of our society to be able to create.

    Leave A Reply