S10mainly Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Hasn't there just been an art auction where over £500 million was spent? £15 m is a snip to a wealthy art collector therefore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denlin Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Hasn't there just been an art auction where over £500 million was spent? £15 m is a snip to a wealthy art collector therefore. It's oscene in this climate of economic decline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Why do you care it's not your money being spent. If some private individual wants to pay 15m for the piece then they'd be silly not to sell it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 How much capital gains tax will they have to pay? Even if its 10% its £1.5 million, then there will be commission to pay to the auctioneers etc. Everyone's a winner, just some more than others. Capital gains tax, like inheritance tax and stamp duty must claw in a fair whack for government, then ultimately us. Chatsworth is a fantastic place, I'm glad some of our heritage has been retained, and if to do so means selling assets then so be it. Personally I'd hate a) the responsibility of looking after an estate like Chatsworth, and b) having to let the public in to make it affordable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 So, I presume, everyone thinks Raphael's rubbish Raphael was a genius, I don't think that is up for debate. At least not in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Is your hobby ' Being a feckless idiot'? Have you considered that some parts of 'humanity' have evolved to such a stage that they appreciate art ... something that humans alone can appreciate? Do you realize that by saying 'Someone called Raphael' and 'worthless piece of paper' makes you sound like pondweed? Are you saying that Raphael is rubbish? The guy's dead ... one of the most important artists ever (for reasons that would be wasted on you) Why do you think people pay so much to own what he's made? It's patently obvious that someone with money would be selling the picture ... that's how things work. Have you ever been to Chatsworth and seen the herculean efforts put in by the Duke and Duchess of Devonshire to allow people, like even yourself, to appreciate what separates us from monkeys? ... I think not. Do you comprehend how much it costs the Devonshires to allow/maintain virtually free access to the world's history of the arts ... once again, I think not. I bet you don't mind spending a bob or two going to Alton Towers (buy one-get one free) or adorning your walls with Athena 'Girl scratching her bottom' posters? Do you not think, that by selling this picture, they may just use the proceeds to educate someone like yourself ... is it actually worth it? Who can tell. Raphael is rubbish art IS crap unless its got zombies in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Lighten up eminence, they live in luxury and they charge us to see their house. Not everybody thinks that to pay £15million for a painting in these times is acceptable. We are in an economic mess and it's hardly surprising that people object Yeah ... the likes of David Beckham aren't objected against, they get paid that per year (or more) ... is that not obscene? At least, the Devonshire's (and many more) try to invest their money into the heritage of our country ... rather than tattoos, customized Range Rovers and 'designer' swimming trunks. I honestly don't understand why people have a problem with this. (I presume you don't go to the Chatsworth estate - to back up your abhorrence of everything it stands for?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denlin Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Yeah ... the likes of David Beckham aren't objected against, they get paid that per year (or more) ... is that not obscene? At least, the Devonshire's (and many more) try to invest their money into the heritage of our country ... rather than tattoos, customized Range Rovers and 'designer' swimming trunks. I honestly don't understand why people have a problem with this. (I presume you don't go to the Chatsworth estate - to back up your abhorrence of everything it stands for?) Actually no I don't go to Chatsworth but I was just trying to make point that I can see why people would find spending that kind of money on a painting obscene and incidentally I class the wealth given to David Beckham and his ilk even more obscene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cressida Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I think you made a mistake by highlighting the Devonshires to make your point, rather it is the less well-off who are feeling the pinch and the loadsa monied families aren't because they already have so much would have sufficed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Lighten up eminence, they live in luxury and they charge us to see their house. Not everybody thinks that to pay £15million for a painting in these times is acceptable. We are in an economic mess and it's hardly surprising that people object It's clearly acceptable to someone or they wouldn't have bought it. Duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.