NEA arts grants are a good investment
Re: “The gentle art of wasting other people’s money,” Daily Outrage, Nov. 19
The Daily Outrage presented an incomplete picture of the National Endowment for the Arts. NEA grants reach every congressional district, support small businesses and improve economies. Operas and festivals — two projects labeled “wasteful” — create jobs for electricians, carpenters and sound engineers. Creative industries comprise 4 percent of American businesses and produce 5.7 million jobs, which generate $29.6 billion in tax revenue and $166.2 billion in economic activity.
NEA-funded projects also attract tourism. Visitors to these events spend money on food, lodging and souvenirs, creating $103 billion in annual revenue for local merchants. Arts industries purchase services and materials from local businesses to mount productions, museum exhibits and festivals. This money flows directly to communities, spurring economic development and revitalizing neighborhoods.
Supporting the NEA is not wasteful. It is a sound investment that benefits communities and individuals nationwide.
Pamela Kalinowski
Alexandria
As executions went down in U.S., crime went up
Re: “Death sentence is no longer necessary,” from readers, Nov. 17
Canadian Paul Kokoski has the luxury of lecturing Americans about capital punishment being “no longer necessary” because Canada’s homicide and crime rates are historically so much lower than in the United States, and overall crime in his home province of Ontario is even lower than Canada’s.
So his conclusion — that “there ultimately remains no moral justification for imposing a sentence of death” because “today, the number of tools the state has for effectively preventing crimes” — flies in the face of historical fact.
When execution was common in the United States, the crime rate was much lower than in the years since it has come increasingly under challenge and become far less common.
Dino Drudi
Alexandria
‘Best and brightest’ should be working in the private sector
Re: “Cutting federal employees pay will not fix debt problem,” from readers, Nov. 16
Colleen Kelley makes the point, echoed by many government union heads, that “Americans want the best and the brightest at these [federal] positions” without citing any poll numbers. I can’t cite any either, but one can still ponder whether America is best served by having its smartest denizens working for Washington.
As far as moving money goes, the government wins hands down. Washington spends several times per government employee what the private sector spends per worker per year.
But government is good only at pursuing simple outcomes (e.g., World War II) and is hopelessly uncoordinated at the complex ones (e.g. the War on Poverty), which are best left to the private sector. Because better minds are better allocated on complex problems, one can argue that society is better off with its geniuses toiling at XYZ corporation than at ABC agency.
Does this prove Ms. Kelley wrong? No, but it makes it awfully hard to prove her right.
Nat Kidder
Ashburn
