HOW WILL IT MAKE THINGS BETTER?

White elephants always hurt...

For those that are hungry: It CAN hurt...

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:Meh. Whatever.

Weak.

I used your technique Trini. I thought you'd understand it.

To get back to the rules .

The thing to keep in mind about the museum is not that it's in Winnipeg...it's that it IS.

Location is immaterial to the quality of the museum...and/or the contents.

This debate should not be about Winnipeg...it should be about the benefit of the museum itself.

Will it provide a service for good? Yes
Will it provide an educational platform? Yes
Will it develop infrastructure improvements? Yes
Will it attract people...which will benefit surrounding business & society? Yes

There are downsides to anything...is the cost high? maybe...but for this size of building and venture...it's not overpriced
Will it cost tax dollars to build? yes...but any large venture these days cost tax dollars in some form.

I haven't heard any arguments about why the museum WON'T benefit, or make things better. The only complaints I've seen/heard is that some people don't like the Aspers, and that tax money is being thrown at it.

The museum board doesn't KNOW yet what's going into the museum (it says that in their literature), other than a section for the holocaust, and a section for aboriginals. They specifically say the decisions for all exhibits have not been decided, because we're in an ever-changing world...and something may take precedence between now, and the time it's ready to open. To me...that's actually a GOOD thing...because it means there is room for change...room for improvement...and the possibility that it won't be "just another museum", spitting out the same boring stuff for the next 50 years.

grumpy old man wrote:

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:Meh. Whatever.

Weak.

I used your technique Trini. I thought you'd understand it.

You won't respond, because you can't defend your point of view. Everyone can see that.

AGEsAces wrote:To get back to the rules .

The thing to keep in mind about the museum is not that it's in Winnipeg...it's that it IS.

Location is immaterial to the quality of the museum...and/or the contents.

This debate should not be about Winnipeg...it should be about the benefit of the museum itself.

Will it provide a service for good? Yes
Will it provide an educational platform? Yes
Will it develop infrastructure improvements? Yes
Will it attract people...which will benefit surrounding business & society? Yes

There are downsides to anything...is the cost high? maybe...but for this size of building and venture...it's not overpriced
Will it cost tax dollars to build? yes...but any large venture these days cost tax dollars in some form.

I haven't heard any arguments about why the museum WON'T benefit, or make things better. The only complaints I've seen/heard is that some people don't like the Aspers, and that tax money is being thrown at it.

The museum board doesn't KNOW yet what's going into the museum (it says that in their literature), other than a section for the holocaust, and a section for aboriginals. They specifically say the decisions for all exhibits have not been decided, because we're in an ever-changing world...and something may take precedence between now, and the time it's ready to open. To me...that's actually a GOOD thing...because it means there is room for change...room for improvement...and the possibility that it won't be "just another museum", spitting out the same boring stuff for the next 50 years.

What difference will it make?

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:Meh. Whatever.

Weak.

I used your technique Trini. I thought you'd understand it.

You won't respond, because you can't defend your point of view. Everyone can see that.

Grow up man.

I don't have to defend anything. I have an opinion and a postion. That is good enough for people like you.

Now back the frick off.

Chillax, dude. If you don't want to debate your point of view, fair enough. I'm willing to defend my views, anytime.

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:Are you suggesting by the mere act of driving (and funding) the museum that the Aspers don't care? Geeze. I just don't get the complete lack of respect accorded the Aspers here.

How would you characterize the respect for the taxpayers that the Aspers have shown? Not asking us if we're on side with their idea. Refusing to appear at even a single press conference to respond to reporters' questions on behalf of the public. Not asking us if the public would allow the museum to be built at the Fork. Not explaining why their attendance figures have dropped from 800,000 to 250,000 in two years, and 100,000 to 20,000 for students visits. What's the impact of these dramatically smaller figures? When will they come begging for more than $22 million in funding in order to keep the doors open?
Talk about contempt for the taxpayer and public at large.

I agree 110%. Something smells fishy...could it be Gail??? LOL

grumpy old man wrote:

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:

Triniman wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:Meh. Whatever.

Weak.

I used your technique Trini. I thought you'd understand it.

You won't respond, because you can't defend your point of view. Everyone can see that.

Grow up man.

I don't have to defend anything. I have an opinion and a postion. That is good enough for people like you.

Now back the frick off.

People like you??? GOM....what do you mean that?

Not you Goth. People that bait others constantly and intentionally despite being told to back off. My post was specifically targeted to one person.

Will it provide a service for good? Yes
Will it provide an educational platform? Yes
Will it develop infrastructure improvements? Yes
Will it attract people...which will benefit surrounding business & society? Yes

This is all pretty much just speculation or your own personal opinion isn't it?

It's as much pure speculation for why it will succeed as all posts are to date that suggest it will fail and that it is a white elephant.

Show me any post that suggests failure that is not someone's own personal speculation or opinion?

Call that bringing a knife to a gun battle if you wish but it is equally specious as all other anti-HRM posts in here.

I hope they put in section for the way this has divided this city .

grumpy old man wrote:It's as much pure speculation for why it will succeed as all posts are to date that suggest it will fail and that it is a white elephant.

Show me any post that suggests failure that is not someone's own personal speculation or opinion?

Call that bringing a knife to a gun battle if you wish but it is equally specious as all other anti-HRM posts in here.

GOM, you should cache these files for 2 years, then display them for everyone to view, once the CHRM opens for one full year. Then I can laugh at the pro-CHRM camp.

Will laughing make you feel superior?

To each his own I guess...

"haven't heard any arguments about why the museum WON'T benefit, or make things better"

Ther problem lies in the fact that NO ONE,, has actually said WHAT the museum is..in pulbic
If you are going to spend 250 Million and 22 million per year after.. you damn well better have a very detailed plan.

If this were a business.. would it pass the muster of the shareholders of the corporation?

Deank wrote:Ther problem lies in the fact that NO ONE,, has actually said WHAT the museum is..in pulbic

To that I say BULLSHITE.

The problem lies in the fact that NO ONE here has actually asked to see the business plan.

It has been stated here that a plan exists and one need only ask for it. So ask for it already. That tired old argument grows very weak.

I've posted excerpts from their website that presents their vision for this museum. If that does not meet your needs then please do post precisely what you need to convince you.

I suspect we could supply detailed business plans and prospectus after prospectus and we will still not satisfy some people. Prove me wrong.

GOM.. THEY admit they are not 100% sure what the museum will be. THEY actually admit that.

Who is THEY and if THEY admit it post it here and cite your reference - a web site address would suffice.

Its a little dated obviously.. but from their own website...

"Ultimately all decisions related to content, buidling, programming and operations will rest with the Board that is yet to be appointed by the Government."

in other words at one time a board which had yet to be appointed would decide what was going to happen.... yup.. thats a great plan.

Great answers from Hollygolightly and AGEsAces, and a big negative nanny award to Trinimum! triniman , why would you complain about the Aspers for not being at a news conferance? I cannot make any sense of your criticism! the Aspers have had a dedication to Winnipeg that is incredibly loyal!
You are saying that they haven't been to a news conferance to answer some dumb ass questions to some dumb ass reporter? that is nonsense!
Can you tell me how many trips they made to Ottawa to get the government to agree to help finance this project? And what is the problem with having $22,000,000 of Ottawa's support for maintenance each and every uear? This is the 1st museum that the Federal government has ever approved to be built out side of Ottawa! The financial benefits are incredible for the City!
Back to the topic!
Direct learning from the museum displays will be more profoung than any history book that will have 1 paragraphs on the subject. I have a history book of the world, and the topic has 3 lines covering the subject.
What I am planning with my Jewish and Israeli friends, is the following:
All "Presidents for Life" from every Country in which there is no democratic government, will be brought for a "forced" visit to the Museum, in the middle of our winter. After this forced visit, if these " govt officials" haven't had a profound change of heart, they will be left outside!

Deank wrote:Its a little dated obviously.. but from their own website...

"Ultimately all decisions related to content, buidling, programming and operations will rest with the Board that is yet to be appointed by the Government."

in other words at one time a board which had yet to be appointed would decide what was going to happen.... yup.. thats a great plan.

I believe you are clutching at straws with this one. Everybody demands business plans yet won't accept sound logic when it comes to EXACTLY what the content will be.

Everybody claims this will be nothing more than a shrine to the holocaust (BTW a complete dumbass thing to say) yet they want to wait until a board is appointed to begin the job of deciding what will be covered.

Lastly, and posted recently by yours truly, they also have suggested that the curator will ultimately make the decisions about what is actually displayed.

Sound planning on anybodies part.

Building a multi-million dollar joint (plus the $25/year) without a clue to what's going in sure is great planning.

Sounds to me that it is an afterthought.

grumpy old man wrote:

Deank wrote:Its a little dated obviously.. but from their own website...

"Ultimately all decisions related to content, buidling, programming and operations will rest with the Board that is yet to be appointed by the Government."

in other words at one time a board which had yet to be appointed would decide what was going to happen.... yup.. thats a great plan.

Lastly, and posted recently by yours truly, they also have suggested that the curator will ultimately make the decisions about what is actually displayed.

Sound planning on anybodies part.

It's not so much the exhibits that concern me. True, I sincerely doubt that people from the US and Europe will fly here just to see something unique, like the recreation of the residential school classroom or the Chinese head tax exhibit or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights document. Lord knows they won't come here just to see the holocaust exhibit when they have superior ones in their own backyards. But I am concerned about the costs. Maybe this project is magically immune to the typical cost increases that other projects experience. Maybe they can account for the DRAMATIC reduction in attendance estimates, 800,000 to 250,000 in two years, etc. Seems to me they are pretty much admitting that they have GROSSLY overestimated the appeal of the museum, probably to make it more appealing to governemnt. It not even slightly surprising that they won't issue a statement, accounting for their dramatic reduction in visitor estimates. They must be hiding something. And, surprise, surprise, the mainstream media won't ask about this, or anything else that could that smacks of proper journalistic inquiry. The owners of the Freep donated $1 millon or so. Think that has anything to do with it?

Deank wrote:Its a little dated obviously.. but from their own website...

"Ultimately all decisions related to content, buidling, programming and operations will rest with the Board that is yet to be appointed by the Government."

in other words at one time a board which had yet to be appointed would decide what was going to happen.... yup.. thats a great plan.

That board has been appointed now...if I remember correctly a guy named Patrick Riley is in charge of it. (I'm not 100% sure on that name...and I don't feel like searching for it right now.

The people who support the museum are supporting the concept of the museum and what it represents. They support the idea and dream that a museum with the purpose of defending "Human Rights" is a good thing...so a "typical" business plan is not required to raise money for it.

There are two groups running the museum project:

The dreamers...who are the fundraisers...with a single task of committing enough money to put the financial planning to a sufficient level. This is headed by Gail Asper.

The planners...who are in charge of deciding the building plans, the content, the infrastructure. This is headed by the guy I mentioned before (again...still not sure on the name).

There is NO way to prove if the museum itself will benefit society, but ANY platform or resource which can challenge Human Rights issues...and which can help to promote peace and educate the people....will provide benefits to at least 1 person...and by benefiting 1 person, the potential is there to benefit more...and to have that benefit pass on exponentially.

Is this museum going to STOP oppression? No...noone is naive enough to believe that.
But could it STOP AN oppression? somewhere? with just one person?
Could it save a life or two...because someone learned something?
quite possibly yes.