Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Millennium
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: Millennium
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
If anyone federal money goes to the project, it is no different than persevering a landmark in another city/state.
Federal spending on all of those needs to go away.
Actually I mean phased out not just eliminated.
But the Federal Government and the whole United States benefits from it. A tourist attraction/landmark is beneficial to ALL of the country. It is also representative of history. I see no reason to discontinue the funding of historical landmarks. If it was a BS new-age art museum or some crap like that I would understand. I mean who honestly believes pissing in a bottle and setting it on fire is art?
I don't agree. If AL/Birmingham wants to erect a statue then they should pay for it. You also highlight another problem wth federal funding. Who's to say what is art and what is not. The Feds? No. Again if AL/Birm. wants a statue or wants someone to piss in a bottle and set it on fire let them pay for it.
It is OBVIOUS that you haven't read the links. Vulcan has been around for almost a 100 years. They aren't "erecting" a statue, but rather persevering and repairing it.
Well given it has been there for 100 years, there should have been plenty of time for the city to save money to do needed repairs. This is strictly state/city spending and not federeal spending.
Read the links. It has been repaired numerous times over the years. It is an iron structure that is exposed to the elements just like the statue of liberty. The City HAS raised money and taken private donations. Sadly, not enough has been raised and essential services would have to be cut to finish the project. The latest solution is a lot more permanent. BTW, please read the links.
