Tewder
Senior Member
Well, you have to use a 'slippery slope' otherwise we end up funding absolutely everything sparing absolutely no expenses. I mean, why aren't we spending $1 trillion on butterfly collecting?
You gave me pause here, Hipster Duck. To put it simply though I just don't see a lot of people advocating for it or too many possible wider benefits, and no amount of marketing spin that would likely make it so. Pussycat Swallowtail be damned!! It's a fine line, I grant you, but I'm not sure the litmus test is solely 'majority rule' here.
I do agree that it can pose a challenge when extreme niche intersects with substantial and specific infrastructure requirements... which is why you do have to step back a bit and consider if there is a bigger picture that might justify the investment. In other words, outside the context of an Olympics bid an investment in luge facilities may just not make sense. An Olympic bid may absolutely make sense, however - which is a whole other thread - and luge facilities may simply be a requirement. TOperson is going apoplectic, I'm sure.
Last edited: