Winnipeg | Canadian Museum for Human Rights - Page 49

cheswick · #**961** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 1:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Let me ask you, do these other national museums have an admission charge policy based on race or ethnicity?

The Canadian museum of history has an identical policy in regards to admissions as the cmhr. Not really sure the relevance though, since you were in opposition to the cmhr long before any sort of admissions policies were announced.

Authentic_City · #**962** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 3:40 PM**

For those who want to know how Canada's national museums are funded, here is a report from the Library of Parliament:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2013-06-e.htm

Not surprisingly, all 6 national museums receive more than 80% of annual funding from the Federal government. Funds from admissions, donations, space rental, gift shop revenues, etc. only make up on average about 16% of annual revenues. It shouldn't be surprising that the CMHR is receiving significant annual federal funding. In the US, national museums are funded nearly 100% by the Federal government (no admission charges). No serious national museum can be funded from admissions alone.

The Manitoba Museum does a bit better with only 55% of total funds coming from government. The MB Museum also provides approximately 30,000 free admissions annually to low income and "at-risk" individuals.

http://www.manitobamuseum.ca/access/

rrskylar · #**963** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 4:23 PM**

Human rights museum shouldn't play favourites:

http://www.winnipegsun.com/2015/01/19/human-rights-museum-shouldnt-play-favourites

Authentic_City · #**964** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 4:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrskylar

Human rights museum shouldn't play favourites:

http://www.winnipegsun.com/2015/01/19/human-rights-museum-shouldnt-play-favourites

As was already said above, this is the exact same admission policy for the Canadian Museum of History (formerly Civilization).

http://www.historymuseum.ca/plan-your-visit/admission-fees/individual-admission-fees

The conservative columnist in the Sun inadvertently makes a good case for scrapping admission fees all together. If all Canadian national museums are are subsidized by about 85% by the taxpayer, why not just offer free admission to all, like in the US?

suburbia · #**965** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 5:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheswick

The Canadian museum of history has an identical policy in regards to admissions as the cmhr. Not really sure the relevance though, since you were in opposition to the cmhr long before any sort of admissions policies were announced.

Agree that the policies are consistent, and I'm not hung up about that. Making the discussion about a standard policy takes us away from the core issues, IE if Human Rights should not actually have been simply a web-site instead of a billion dollar boondoggle.

I'm pleased people are bringing up the Canadian Museum of History. It is an absolutely exceptional museum and with a fantastic collection and story to tell. Normalizing things, I'm wondering how many paying visitors go to the Canadian Museum of History in Q1 2015 as compared to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights? We don't know the answer to that yet, but I'm hoping the reporting is at a granularity that we can look at this comparison closer. I believe for the Canadian Museum of History, the number is approximately 1,500,000 people per year.

I wonder if the Prime Minister has visited the Canadian Museum of History?

suburbia · #**966** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 5:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

If all Canadian national museums are are subsidized by about 85% by the taxpayer, why not just offer free admission to all, like in the US?

Wow! Pulling us down the slippery slope pretty fast! The irony is that the right wing agenda here involves a totally socialist idea - which they support as long as only their stories are told in the building. Extremists always speak out of both sides of their mouths.

Authentic_City · #**967** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

... I'm wondering how many paying visitors go to the Canadian Museum of History in Q1 2015 as compared to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights?...

Now you're comparing apples and oranges. That is like comparing the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum to the Smithsonian National Postal Museum.

Why not instead compare the CMHR with the Canadian Museum of Immigration? Both are located outside of the Capital Region and both have less "🞵🞵🞵🞵" themes?

If you want to do some research on attendance, annual and quarterly reports are available online for all publicly funded museums, but it is way too early for the Q1 2015 report. I'd be interested to hear what you find.

Incidentally, the argument that the CMHR should have been a website is weak and could apply to virtually any museum. Why have any museum, art gallery or zoo in this day and age when content can be put online? Why build large dioramas in museums when a picture or video online would suffice? Harper is spending millions building new dioramas in his ideologically reoriented Museum of History to commemorate such events as the last spike in the CPR. Can't we just look at historical photos on a website to appreciate this event?

Riverman · #**968** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Why have any museum, art gallery or zoo in this day and age when content can be put online?

Because dinosaurs.

suburbia · #**969** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 11:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

Now you're comparing apples and oranges.

I don't get you. Are you suggesting the CMHR is superior or inferior, or simply disadvantaged because it is in Winnipeg? All that matters little - one needs to normalize. EG subsidy per paying visitor, as an example.

suburbia · #**970** Posted **Jan 20, 2015, 11:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riverman

Because dinosaurs.

Real museums have actual historical artifacts and legitimate research departments.

On the other hand, we also need other physical spaces such as to enable business meetings and wedding receptions.

Authentic_City · #**971** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 2:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

I don't get you. Are you suggesting the CMHR is superior or inferior, or simply disadvantaged because it is in Winnipeg? All that matters little - one needs to normalize. EG subsidy per paying visitor, as an example.

I'm not sure what you're not understanding. You're clearly ideologically opposed to the concept of the CMHR so reasoned argument and debate informed by facts appear to be beyond your grasp. If you want to engage in a debate about attendence and operating costs, check the readily available facts and feel free to chime in. Otherwise, it all just sounds like sour grapes. The CMHR is a reality. Get used to it.

suburbia · #**972** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 8:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authentic_City

The CMHR is a reality. Get used to it.

Nothing is forever, and as a subsidy sink that is not generating enough paying visitors, we need to be prepared to cut our losses. It is not prudent to get "used to" unacceptable per-visitor losses.

Biff · #**973** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 8:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

Nothing is forever, and as a subsidy sink that is not generating enough paying visitors, we need to be prepared to cut our losses. It is not prudent to get "used to" unacceptable per-visitor losses.

So what will happen if we don't need to cut our losses and it becomes a popular tourist attraction generating enough paying visitors?

suburbia · #**974** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff

So what will happen if we don't need to cut our losses and it becomes a popular tourist attraction generating enough paying visitors?

Then it becomes like old macdonald's farm in the okanagan. Silly, but we'll live with it.

Of course, what you are suggesting is hypothetical, and all known indicators suggest it to not be plausible. Do you guys comprehend that even conservative prime minister Stephen Harper chose not to go?

I'd bet Clark Griswold would want to go!
http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20407792_20812494,00.html

esquire · #**975** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 9:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

Then it becomes like old macdonald's farm in the okanagan. Silly, but we'll live with it.

Of course, what you are suggesting is hypothetical, and all known indicators suggest it to not be plausible. Do you guys comprehend that even conservative prime minister Stephen Harper chose not to go?

I'd bet Clark Griswold would want to go!
http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20407792_20812494,00.html

Yeah, we get it already... you have some sort of grudge against this place, so nobody else is allowed to like it.

Biff · #**976** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 9:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

Of course, what you are suggesting is hypothetical, and all known indicators suggest it to not be plausible.

🞵🞵🞵🞵! You are like some kind of Oracle where you can clearly see the future.

Tell me please........what are the numbers for tonight's 6-49?

bomberjet · #**977** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 10:04 PM**

Everybody gets your boats and fishing rods out. Seems there's a lot of trolling going on here, we might as well join in!

CoryB · #**978** Posted **Jan 21, 2015, 10:37 PM**

Can someone update the title of the thread since construction is completed.

blueandgoldguy · #**979** Posted **Jan 22, 2015, 12:17 AM**

Judging by his posting history, I have to assume Suburbia is from the Calgary area. It's all starting to make sense now...

Authentic_City · #**980** Posted **Jan 22, 2015, 3:12 AM**

Hillary Clinton makes unplanned trip to CMHR:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/Clinton-makes-last-minute-stop-at-CMHR-289377021.html