What a nonsensical comment. Schools, roads etc aren't 'nice to haves' but rather 'need to haves'. There is a difference. Parks and rec centres? yeah they are nice to haves to, but there is only so much money to go around and far more people want those nice to haves. A 30' statue made of perogies is probably a nice to have for some people, but those people need to pay for it themselves.
Retaining our architectural history is a 'nice to have' and a great pet project for left wing libtards who don't mind spending other people's money. Best to keep it to a few important projects, and not any old heap of wood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DizzyEdge
It really just depends on your values. We as society have in general decided that items for the public good don't need to rely on generous benefactors. We don't ask "complainers" to build their own schools, buy their own parks, build their own roads, buy their own rec centers and community swimming pools. I include retaining our own architectural history in that list of public good items.
That said if the move had been done as planned there could have been a lot of different ways to fund the restoration.
|
Threaded Mode