Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The way the museums are nominally free (by law) and then they shake you down anyway is disgusting; it's too bad Bloomberg resolved it the wrong way, but what do you expect from a billionaire? (Fortunately I have a billionaire paying for my admissions too; my employer has a corporate membership. But it still ticks me off)
Museums get most if their art in the form of bequests, these bequests represent charitable deductions from owed taxes generally on the very rich. If the public did not forgive these taxes, museums would find their galleries filled with a lot of nothing.
So in essence every museum and its benefactors has their taxes paid by the public.
The presumption has to be that the public should not pay to see the artwork that it is subsidizing.
This amount is FAR in excess of the forgiven rent on the land or any direct City or State grants that museums trot out as "trivial."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.