[jimnotgym]

But giving housing or tax breaks needs lots of admin. Isn't that less efficient?

Giving housing forces people to live in certain places. What if you are a traveling musician, you might be better off with a van.

It is like the Victorian view of giving charity. 'Don't give them money, give them food', like the people don't know what they need.

[BSDobelix]

>But giving housing or tax breaks needs lots of admin. Isn't that less efficient?

Art community's are most always self managing, i would argue finding out who makes art is much more complicated.

>Giving housing forces people to live in certain places.

No one is forced to take free housing or being an artist, if you want something for free you have to play by rules.

>like the people don't know what they need

True, but why are people who are artist different from anyone else, that's my critique. Why is creating art more important then preserving art, being a scientist, a rare-potato-farmer, a retro-game-preserver...or a small town politician?

[jimnotgym]

> True, but why are people who are artist different from anyone else, that's my critique.

I don't think it is helpful to frame it in terms of, 'sure they should get it, but what about other people doing public good? Since the others can't get it, the artists shouldn't'. How about saying, 'this is a great start, how do we get a broader scheme for other philanthropic causes'?

[BSDobelix]

>I don't think it is helpful to frame it in terms of, 'sure they should get it, but what about other people doing public good? Since the others can't get it, the artists shouldn't'.

I think it's the only logical way, same right for everyone, occupation is not a factor for additional rights.

> 'this is a great start,

And the end...sadly.