FARK.com: (7478112) The super-rich are going nuts buying up art, creating an art bubble by spending millions for pieces that aren't even a decade old. Please

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		The super-rich are going nuts buying up art, creating an art bubble by spending millions for pieces that aren't even a decade old. Please - won't somebody think of the super-rich? (thedailybeast.com)		11
		More: Silly, Blake Gopnik, Damien Hirst, gay icons, total sales, fundamental structure, Jeff Koons

• • •

3227 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Dec 2012 at 12:45 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7478112

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

Voting Results (Smartest)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh voting results (Smartest or Funniest) or Return to comments

Archived thread

LL316		2012-12-10 12:56:51 PM

3 votes:

FlashHarry: this is why we can't raise taxes on them by even a penny.*

*this is what republicans actually believe.

This is what Democrats actually believe Republicans believe.

BarkingUnicorn		2012-12-10 12:55:03 PM

2 votes:

ManateeGag: I thought they were supposed to be creating jobs with all their millions.

Art dealers, appraisers, auctioneers, insurers, packing and shipping staffers, frame makers, installers, security specialists... lotta jobs supported by extravagant consumption.

If your career plan is, "follow the money," you could do worse than chasing the 1%.

ManateeGag		2012-12-10 10:19:23 AM

2 votes:

I thought they were supposed to be creating jobs with all their millions.

ManRay		2012-12-10 08:36:41 AM

2 votes:

Cythraul: Maybe they'll be nice and donate all that art to museums in about 40 or so years from now.

Only if they get a tax deduction.

Onkel Buck		2012-12-10 01:56:00 PM

1 votes:

Well they are gonna need to have something in their homes for us poors to loot since they are hiding their money.

clyph		2012-12-10 01:03:03 PM

1 votes:

cgraves67: SO let the bubble burst. There are two consequences. 1) Some artists must surely be profitting from this.

Nope. The only ones profiting from this are the gallery owners. The artist doesn't get paid again every time the work changes hands, at least not in the US - they only get half (or less) of the first sale. If an artist sells a painting for $10k, and 10 years later it goes for $1M at auction, the artist gets jack shiat from that sale (unless there's a contract that says otherwise). The artist does benefit indirectly, both from reputation as well as sales of reproductions of the work. When you buy a painting (or statue, or photographic print), you're just buying the physical artifact, not the copyright to the work (again, unless there's a contract that says otherwise).

I'm given to understand that it does work a little differently in the EU and that artists do get some compensation in that situation, but I'm not familiar with the details.

Russ1642		2012-12-10 12:48:52 PM

1 votes:

FlashHarry: FishyFred: No tulips here.

those who fail to study history...

The same graph can be used for bitcoin value.

FishyFred		2012-12-10 10:47:01 AM

1 votes:

The Stealth Hippopotamus: But the rich just hide all that money in off shore accounts and in their mattresses. How dare they spend money and generate taxable activity! We must raise taxes on art to discourage this behavior!!

Some of them purposely use art to hide their money. If they want to liquidate, they sell some pieces.

This is not really a bubble. No tulips here.

The Stealth Hippopotamus		2012-12-10 10:12:54 AM

1 votes:

But the rich just hide all that money in off shore accounts and in their mattresses. How dare they spend money and generate taxable activity! We must raise taxes on art to discourage this behavior!!