Comments on: Why Detroit’s art must stay http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: nixonfan http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/comment-page-1/#comment-47510 Sat, 29 Jun 2013 17:03:56 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22111#comment-47510 When a corporation defaults on its bonds, it assets become the property of its bondholders. I don’t care what Detroit “collected”, it’s not theirs anymore.

]]>
By: Kaleberg http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/comment-page-1/#comment-47453 Sun, 23 Jun 2013 20:58:37 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22111#comment-47453 Some people just think they are Hermann Goering.

]]>
By: realist50 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/comment-page-1/#comment-47403 Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:54:46 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22111#comment-47403 I largely agree with Roger.

I’m not an attorney, but I understand the Michigan AG’s point about donated art being held in charitable trust by the city even though the city has title to it. It strikes me as reasonable, however, that art purchased by the city – which is the subject of the aforementioned footnote 16 – isn’t treated the same. It was bought by the city, and the city has had continual title to it. Sure sounds like a city-owned asset.

]]>
By: RogerNegotiator http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/comment-page-1/#comment-47397 Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:12:19 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22111#comment-47397 The issue is ultimately a legal one, not a moral one. Legally, the AG’s opinion is very interesting, but take a look at footnote 16 on page 21. This argument is placed in a footnote because it’s the weakest argument and the biggest problem with the AG’s position. As for the moral aspect, I am not sure that an obligation to preserve art for future generations is any more sacred than an obligation to pay pensions to the present one.

]]>
By: paddlefirm http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/comment-page-1/#comment-47387 Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:47:47 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22111#comment-47387 Thank you for excellent analysis and comment on this. The art in the DIA is there for the benefit of the citizens now and into the future. Punishing future generations (and this is a form of collective punishment) for the wrong-headed shenanigans of a few of today’s decision makers is crass and destructive. It is proposed by those who do not understand the value of Art, only the price of a dollar. Detroit should fight this with all its heart.

]]>
By: very-simple http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/18/why-detroits-art-must-stay/comment-page-1/#comment-47382 Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:55:49 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22111#comment-47382 While I don’t know the specifics of the DIA collection, I would also hazard a guess that at least some of the art was donated by wealthy patrons, and that such donations have conditions related to DIA’s ability to transfer the art, even if it wanted to.

]]>