Trickling Down

I think at this point most (on the left at least) would agree that trickle down economics does not work. It hasn't worked in almost every place around the globe it has been tried. A healthy economy does not reside in large numbers in poverty and large numbers of extraordinarily wealthy.

I'm not stepping out on a limb much by saying a healthy middle class is on of the keys to economic prosperity over the long term. The past eight years have shown some of this played out in real time. To be honest I don't know anyone from the center on to leaning all the way left that would challenge that.

The majority of folks that I know in the arts tend to be left leaning. They would agree that consistently favoring massive corporations and millionaires over small business and the middle class has had disastrous effects on our nations overall health. Couple this with massive tax cuts for the rich and super rich and we have people actively scrambling to avoid a possible recession.

The health of our economy and our nation does not reside in companies that are "too big to fail." It is worth noting that being so big didn't actually stop many of them from failing. We need close to a trillion dollars of our taxpayer money to stop the collapse--or if not stopping the financial collapse, at least putting on a temporary tourniquet.

There are massive challenges facing our nation, and the state of the arts along with our country. It is comforting to finally have a president elect who has an arts policy.

Many have spoken of Tuesdays election as closing doors on the last eight years, our long deep seated racial wounds, maybe even the negative direction many in the boomer generation have lead us in the past three decades. Hope is a beautiful, powerful, presence that has been gone far too long from our everyday lives.

Amongst all the hope--I am more hopeful for the future of our country than any time I can remember--I can't help but wonder, if trickle down economics is untenable, why do so few administrators, funders, critics, or even artists question the basic logic of trickle down art? (Excepting those who work consistently on the fringe or by choice with small organizations.)

I know a lot of people have questioned the programming at major arts institutions; questioned executive pay in the arts; questioned the 501c3 model. But few people I have spoken with have ever questioned the most basic structure of our collective arts organizations which is trickle down economics applied to art. Why do so many left-leaning people actively drink the neo-conservative kool-aid of an artistic variant of Reaganomics, replete with tax exemtions, shelters and breaks that Enron would have killed for?

I don't understand. If our economy and our nation is not better off with a few mega-corporations, why do so many well meaning people across the arts truly believe we are better off with a few mega-institutions?