# New Years Firework Displays: Is it Just Me?



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

I normally attend a party at this time of year but I'm still recuperating and was advised by my doctor not to go. Perhaps this explains my mood? 

This video really annoyed me, I have nothing against anyone having a good time and celebrating. Although I have been realatively untouched by recent economic and financial woes many people have not been so lucky. Early today I heard on the radio that *Sydney's* firework display cost *four million pounds* and I imagine *London's* would cost about the same (I haven't been able to find the figure yet).

Now I think sort of big public display is slighty over the top and a huge waste of public funds but this was worse than normal. Not only was it (*in my opinion*) rubbish but they couldn't even synchronize it to a nice pricie of classical music? 

In an effort to turn into more than just a rant. What would you set your firework display to? 

Happy New Year!

*L'Grinch*


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I think exactly the same as you and was going to post a thread about it myself. I think it is nothing short of obscene, self-indulgent selfishness for money like that to be spent not only during a recession, but so long as poverty still exists. The only argument in favour of it would be if the money spent on drawing the crowds generated even more money in the tourist economy. I have absolutely no idea about the functioning of economics like that, but if it did boost local economy, I think it would only be worthy if at least the amount spent on the fireworks was recooped by the government in sales taxes or whatever to spend on public services. That seems unlikely to me, but numbers are often counter-intuitive.

It doesn't surprise me though, because we are fundamentally an obscene, self-indulgent, and selfish race, filled with cognitive dissonances. We have miseries and travesties broadcast at us every day, and we turn our heads to be entertained so that we can forget about the immense suffering of people we have never met. Personally, I try my best to forget as little as possible, and to contribute as much as I can, which is precisely why displays like this only remind me once again that there are people in great need and this use of money is an offence to their existence.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

I was a bit shocked to find out that in my island, we have the biggest fireworks display in the world . 
But in this case I'm pretty sure that it helps our economy, because it is based on tourism anyway.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Thank you both very much for replying! I thought no-one was going to and I was just being a b***h perhaps not? 

*Polednice* I agree with you but like the olympics and the royal wedding all these things are ment to help the economy expect when they don't. Far more important things to spend that money on like say the people? I'm getting off topic I do feel bad though as I wrote this for my own self-indulgent and selfish reasons. I was given a kitten for *Christmas* and she doesn't like the noise at all. 

*Jan*! It's very nice to see you again. I hadn't seen you post since I came back although I had seen your *Santa* hat so knew you were still active (nicely done by the way).  I had a quick look are you from *Madeira Island, Portugal*? I don't know why but I thought you at least lived in the *UK*. Happy new year to you both and everyone else.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

Lenfer said:


> *Jan*! It's very nice to see you again. I hadn't seen you post since I came back although I had seen your *Santa* hat so knew you were still active (nicely done by the way).  I had a quick look are you from *Madeira Island, Portugal*? I don't know why but I thought you at least lived in the *UK*. Happy new year to you both and everyone else.


It's true, I haven't been around here much lately. It's nice to see you too .
Yes I'm from Madeira Island and I always see the fireworks here. Thanks, I like my santa hat too hehe.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I think exactly the same as you and was going to post a thread about it myself. I think it is nothing short of obscene, self-indulgent selfishness for money like that to be spent not only during a recession, but so long as poverty still exists.

So we should stop wasting money on supporting the arts and all forms of entertainment until the economy turns around and all poverty is eradicated from the face of the Earth... in other words... forever?


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

I agree it's obscene to spend money on these huge displays.

*StlukesguildOhio* Surely spending money on arts and music is different? I hate fireworks and never mind the poor kittens, they terrify me.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

StlukesguildOhio Surely spending money on arts and music is different? I hate fireworks and never mind the poor kittens, they terrify me.

So you don't like fireworks so we should cut wasteful funding for them... but what of those who don't like the art that our public institutions spend public funds upon? As for the kittens... I hate cats.:devil:


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> So we should stop wasting money on supporting the arts and all forms of entertainment until the economy turns around and all poverty is eradicated from the face of the Earth... in other words... forever?


I think you know you're being a little silly! Fireworks displays are a thousand times more vacuous than the arts, and it doesn't matter whether I dislike the displays or others dislike the arts, because the arts can be shown to have many good effects on people and society, whereas fireworks are totally vapid displays of wasted wealth. But hell knows there are other, tremendously larger pots of money that we should be sharing around elsewhere. **** these people who say we shouldn't be spending money on science and the arts when our military budget is astronomically higher.

EDIT: Lenfer, gimme a picture of the kitty!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I think you know you're being a little silly! Fireworks displays are a thousand times more vacuous than the arts...

Of course I am playing the "Devil's Advocate"... but then you are playing right into the hands of those who question funding for such "elitist" endeavors as the arts. A great majority of the populace must surely question the millions spent on the sort of crap that fills the Tate Modern, the Venice Bienale, etc... I'm going to guess that far many more people take pleasure in a fireworks display than in the latest showing of Jeff Koons or Damien Hirst or a concert of Philip Glass, Xenakis, etc...

...it doesn't matter whether I dislike the displays or others dislike the arts, because the arts can be shown to have many good effects on people and society...

Is this so? Hitler's good taste... his love of Wagner, Strauss, and Elizabeth Schwarzkopf doesn't seem to have resulted in many good effects upon society. And then there were the Borgias and the Medici... or did you forget this classic line in film:






As an educator I am repeatedly confronted with demands by uncultured administrators who see the "value" of the arts as solely existing in pragmatic and utilitarian terms... and yet I am fully aware that most of these claims (music improves math skills, etc...) are debatable at best.

...whereas fireworks are totally vapid displays of wasted wealth.

One could point out that such displays quite likely result in an influx of tourist dollars that far surpasses the expenditure. On the other hand... how many other vacuous displays of wealth are we surrounded with?

But hell knows there are other, tremendously larger pots of money that we should be sharing around elsewhere.

Sharing? You seem quite ready to spend the money others have labored for quite freely. Spoken like someone who has probably never held down a real job in his life. I am all for taxing the wealthy at a more equitable rate, dealing with the extremes of corporate and governmental greed, jailing all these scheister bankers, establishing better economic oversights, and helping those who are truly in need, but the notion that entitlements are and should be something without cost is another cancer that is destroying us economically.

**** these people who say we shouldn't be spending money on science and the arts when our military budget is astronomically higher.

I have no problem with that sentiment... and you might do well to recognize that your military spending is nothing compared to what we are spending... and wasting. If the UN weren't so useless and biased I say that the role and cost of acting as the world's police force is something that should be shared on a more equitable basis.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I think exactly the same as you and was going to post a thread about it myself. I think it is nothing short of obscene, self-indulgent selfishness for money like that to be spent not only during a recession, but so long as poverty still exists.
> 
> So we should stop wasting money on supporting the arts and all forms of entertainment until the economy turns around and all poverty is eradicated from the face of the Earth... in other words... forever?


I can't really say for other countries but the *UK* government has cut the majority of it's public funding to the arts. It has also took away the ringfence on public monies used for libraries and such leading to the closure of many libraries up and down the country including a very good local library near me.

Without getting into to the political debate too much other things cut included help for the disabled and elderly. There is "_the arts_" a public good in my opinion and dare I say a force for good in the world. Cut money for this but spend lots of money on fireworks and a disc jockey? Not forgetting the billions of public money used to fund a month or so of watching people run very fast. I think anyone can see the difference. I see no need for your glib reply.

Art isn't just for the elite I think this is a grave misconception that the popular media likes to spread. It can change lives, take many out of lifes of crime or drugs and so on and so on. I think the media have that horrible sort of for lack of a better word "middle-class" attitude that this isn't for the general public they are too stupid/ignorant etc.

Edit:

I love *The Third Man*.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Then there's the effect of fireworks on the local avian population. Two years in a row thousands of birds died in Arkansas on New Year's Eve, and they're thinking the explosions caused a mass panic.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/thousands-birds-fall-dead-arkansas-year-eve-article-1.999476?localLinksEnabled=false


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Manxfeeder said:


> Then there's the effect of fireworks on the local avian population. Two years in a row thousands of birds died in Arkansas on New Year's Eve, and they're thinking the explosions caused a mass panic.
> 
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/thousands-birds-fall-dead-arkansas-year-eve-article-1.999476?localLinksEnabled=false


Thanks for posting that link *Manx*, sad if that truely was the cause.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Is this so? Hitler's good taste... his love of Wagner, Strauss, and Elizabeth Schwarzkopf doesn't seem to have resulted in many good effects upon society. And then there were the Borgias and the Medici...


I'm not quite sure where this came from. I was talking about the positive influences of art on an individual; not about the supposed benefits of art decreed worthy by a dictator!



StlukesguildOhio said:


> As an educator I am repeatedly confronted with demands by uncultured administrators who see the "value" of the arts as solely existing in pragmatic and utilitarian terms... and yet I am fully aware that most of these claims (music improves math skills, etc...) are debatable at best.


There are many types of minds that we have to convince of the value of the arts, and if in some cases this means being pragmatic and utilitarian, then that's fair enough. And a scientific fact such as the cognitive benefits of learning to play an instrument are not "debatable" - they are true, false, or unknown; it's not an issue of logic. As it happens, I am continually seeing new research (and public policy) where music (and other performance arts) at the very least significantly boost a child's academic achievement even if it doesn't rewire their little brain.



StlukesguildOhio said:


> One could point out that such displays quite likely result in an influx of tourist dollars that far surpasses the expenditure. On the other hand... how many other vacuous displays of wealth are we surrounded with?


I did point out this caveat in my first post on this thread, stating that I have no handle on the economics. And, of course, I am just as disgusted at all our other vacuous displays of wealth! 



StlukesguildOhio said:


> Sharing? You seem quite ready to spend the money others have labored for quite freely. Spoken like someone who has probably never held down a real job in his life. I am all for taxing the wealthy at a more equitable rate, dealing with the extremes of corporate and governmental greed, jailing all these scheister bankers, establishing better economic oversights, and helping those who are truly in need, but the notion that entitlements are and should be something without cost is another cancer that is destroying us economically.


"Laboured" is perhaps a misnomer in a comfortable society that has moved away from manufacturing to service industries with people sitting on their arses, but that's just a pedantic linguistic point (and, even so, I don't think people should be taxed more for doing less manual labour, I'm just being obtuse!). I never suggested that taxes should be raised; I suggested that if X taxes are going to be taken _anyway_, that same pot of money could be put to better use.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

_Originally Posted by StlukesguildOhio 
Is this so? Hitler's good taste... his love of Wagner, Strauss, and Elizabeth Schwarzkopf doesn't seem to have resulted in many good effects upon society. And then there were the Borgias and the Medici..._

I'm not quite sure where this came from. I was talking about the positive influences of art on an individual; not about the supposed benefits of art decreed worthy by a dictator!

But were not Hitler and the Borgias and Medicis, etc... "individuals"? How di their love of Art benefit them as individuals? can you prove objectively that Art improves life for the individuals more than a fireworks display or athletics or any other form of entertainment?

_As an educator I am repeatedly confronted with demands by uncultured administrators who see the "value" of the arts as solely existing in pragmatic and utilitarian terms... and yet I am fully aware that most of these claims (music improves math skills, etc...) are debatable at best._

There are many types of minds that we have to convince of the value of the arts, and if in some cases this means being pragmatic and utilitarian, then that's fair enough. And a scientific fact such as the cognitive benefits of learning to play an instrument are not "debatable" - they are true, false, or unknown; it's not an issue of logic. As it happens, I am continually seeing new research (and public policy) where music (and other performance arts) at the very least significantly boost a child's academic achievement even if it doesn't rewire their little brain.

No... there is no objective proof, I can assure you as an educator who is required to keep up on such studies. There is a correlation between students who do better in mat and those who study music, but correlation does not prove causation. It may be the inverse: students who are better in math do well in music... or it may simply be that smarter students do better in both math and music. Of course arts and music educators want their to be a link because it justifies their existence and the financial outlays. The reality is that I agree that we need to support the arts as we should support athletics, science, math, etc... for the simple reason that our children are not all going to major in business administration and our children all learn differently.

_One could point out that such displays quite likely result in an influx of tourist dollars that far surpasses the expenditure. On the other hand... how many other vacuous displays of wealth are we surrounded with?_

I did point out this caveat in my first post on this thread, stating that I have no handle on the economics. And, of course, I am just as disgusted at all our other vacuous displays of wealth! 

And of course sporting events, your recent Royal Wedding, the American Presidential Inauguration, etc... all of these things bring in lots of money.

_Sharing? You seem quite ready to spend the money others have labored for quite freely. Spoken like someone who has probably never held down a real job in his life. I am all for taxing the wealthy at a more equitable rate, dealing with the extremes of corporate and governmental greed, jailing all these scheister bankers, establishing better economic oversights, and helping those who are truly in need, but the notion that entitlements are and should be something without cost is another cancer that is destroying us economically._

"Laboured" is perhaps a misnomer in a comfortable society that has moved away from manufacturing to service industries with people sitting on their arses, but that's just a pedantic linguistic point (and, even so, I don't think people should be taxed more for doing less manual labour, I'm just being obtuse!). I never suggested that taxes should be raised; I suggested that if X taxes are going to be taken anyway, that same pot of money could be put to better use.

Now who's stretching things? Because the modern post-industrial worker no longer labors physically in the fields or in the mines he or she is no different from the slacker sitting on his *** watching TV all day and drinking and the latter is just as entitled to his or her salary? Obviously there will always be disputes as to how the tax dollars raised are being spent. I have little doubt we waste far too much on the military, on padding out special programs to make politicians in each state or city or county look good.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> But were not Hitler and the Borgias and Medicis, etc... "individuals"? How di their love of Art benefit them as individuals? can you prove objectively that Art improves life for the individuals more than a fireworks display or athletics or any other form of entertainment?


Mileage may vary. I can't objectively prove the benefits that art can have - all I can do is appeal to the sense of enrichment that we all feel when we immerse ourselves in it. It gives us the opportunity to see the world from new perspectives and different times, to experience emotions and senses above and beyond the mundaneness of everyday life. Perhaps a fireworks display can induce the same level of emotional excitement, but it doesn't connect us with our cultural heritage or foster our identities as part of a long historical narrative. Those are values few people would argue with.



StlukesguildOhio said:


> No... there is no objective proof, I can assure you as an educator who is required to keep up on such studies. There is a correlation between students who do better in mat and those who study music, but correlation does not prove causation. It may be the inverse: students who are better in math do well in music... or it may simply be that smarter students do better in both math and music. Of course arts and music educators want their to be a link because it justifies their existence and the financial outlays. The reality is that I agree that we need to support the arts as we should support athletics, science, math, etc... for the simple reason that our children are not all going to major in business administration and our children all learn differently.


No objective proof at the moment. I already conceded that the basis of the results so far witnessed may not be neurological, but so what if they're not? For example, what if in a purely social level, the interaction is not that the performance arts increases cognitive abilities in other subjects, but that access to the performance arts increases student attendance, securing more hours in school and therefore better results. Is that not reason enough to invest in the arts?



StlukesguildOhio said:


> And of course sporting events, your recent Royal Wedding, the American Presidential Inauguration, etc... all of these things bring in lots of money.


Indeed, I don't like any of them, but if the numbers genuinely work out then I can't complain (too much!). 



StlukesguildOhio said:


> Now who's stretching things? Because the modern post-industrial worker no longer labors physically in the fields or in the mines he or she is no different from the slacker sitting on his *** watching TV all day and drinking and the latter is just as entitled to his or her salary? Obviously there will always be disputes as to how the tax dollars raised are being spent. I have little doubt we waste far too much on the military, on padding out special programs to make politicians in each state or city or county look good.


You're putting a multitude of unfair words in my mouth. As I made quite clear, I was being _linguistically_ pedantic. I didn't use "sitting on their arses" to mean lazy and unproductive; I meant it purely in its most literal sense because I was objecting to the use of the word "labour" which is outdated for most modern jobs. People most certainly _earn_ their money, and they deserve it, but they don't _labour_ for it.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Manxfeeder said:


> Then there's the effect of fireworks on the local avian population. Two years in a row thousands of birds died in Arkansas on New Year's Eve, and they're thinking the explosions caused a mass panic.
> 
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/thousands-birds-fall-dead-arkansas-year-eve-article-1.999476?localLinksEnabled=false


Oh no. This is so unnecessary.


----------



## janealex (Apr 7, 2010)

Cool and awesome video that is its really so amazing.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Mileage may vary. I can't objectively prove the benefits that art can have - all I can do is appeal to the sense of enrichment that we all feel when we immerse ourselves in it. It gives us the opportunity to see the world from new perspectives and different times, to experience emotions and senses above and beyond the mundaneness of everyday life. Perhaps a fireworks display can induce the same level of emotional excitement, but it doesn't connect us with our cultural heritage or foster our identities as part of a long historical narrative. Those are values few people would argue with.
> 
> No objective proof at the moment. I already conceded that the basis of the results so far witnessed may not be neurological, but so what if they're not? For example, what if in a purely social level, the interaction is not that the performance arts increases cognitive abilities in other subjects, but that access to the performance arts increases student attendance, securing more hours in school and therefore better results. Is that not reason enough to invest in the arts?
> 
> ...


I think you' re wasting your time and **** is correct, an *** is a sort of donkey thing !


----------

