Obama bad for Broadway?? — Page 2

per usual, I side with PalJoey.

---

Hmmm...Reaganomics really helped out the mid 80s...it took London money to get broadway moving again...that was Broadway's lowest point...and PJ is right, making Reagan responsible for the slump in the 90's as well!

---

theaterguy, not only will patrons having less money hurt Broadway, but producers will have production troubles. Many small businesses supply goods to Broadway (scenery, costumes, lights, etc). Obama's economic plans will hurt small business owners, thereby making it difficult to produce a show to begin with.

---

"well its not the top 5% anymore...the number has fallen from 250,000, to 200,000 to 150,000 to 120,000. I know that my family falls into that bracket and we're by no means rich. I know that we probably could not afford a family trip to NYC without that extra money. "

You need to learn how to read. Obama's tax plan calls for increases on individuals making $200,000 or more and couples making $250,000 or more. Anyone making less than $200,000 will see a decrease in taxes. Even if HALF your income was taxed (which it won't be, but IF), you still have at least a take-home of $100,000/year. If you can't live on that as an individual, you have some seriously mixed-up priorities. There isn't a location in this country where you can't live very comfortably on $100,000 per year.

"Becuase this is a Broadway message board, just wondering what an Obama presidency will mean for the industry."

Broadway is not on Obama's platform any more than it was on Bush's, so this questions is both irrelevant and ridiculous. People with money will generally spend it. While I by no stretch of the imagination am rich, I am not, at least at the moment, affected by the economic downturn, so I haven't altered my spending habits. Though the economy has hurt investors, rich people are still rich, and they are still going to spend their money.

>>>theaterguy, not only will patrons having less money hurt Broadway, but producers will have production troubles. Many small businesses supply goods to Broadway (scenery, costumes, lights, etc). Obama's economic plans will hurt small business owners, thereby making it difficult to produce a show to begin with. <<<

And to add to the list above, the prices to put on a show can be outrages. Just like the strike started because an individual is paid for 4 hours of work and there only duty is to push a piano once! So if people start to conserve in theatres, then the operating budgets of shows MIGHT go down if a show is capped at $40Mil and will take it forever to recoup!

Taxes aside, the economy as a whole is a concern for current producers and their investors if people can risk hundreds of thousands of dollars when their other investments go under

---

Oh my God, you mean they'll have to cut back on extravagances like the multi-media show in All My Sons and the amazing levitating bed in Billy Elliot? The best posting on here is PalJoey, he pretty much said it all. Call me crazy, but this might just be a day when we should be thinking about what's good for the planet...

from barackobama.com:

"Middle class families will see their taxes cut – and no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase."

turn off fox news, you knucklehead ...

Oh, because Fox news is bad or something? What it does is give two sides to every argument. They may favor the conservatives a little bit more, but so what? Pretty much every other channel favors the liberals. The show isn't called 'Hannity and Hannity' now is it?

And as for the $250,000 rule, that's a problem. It just so happens that most people making under $250,000 aren't the ones creating jobs. Higher taxes on those who create jobs means less jobs that will be created and/or kept.

---

Updated On: 11/4/08 at 03:10 PM

It's great that you don't mind giving up your money, but I don't think that the government should force you to do so. I'm not rich, but I oppose redistribution of the wealth.

But like you said, that isn't what this post is about.

---

In all fairness folks, is this tax things gonna real take place? Just like the Governator said he will help the school districts with their finances and add more and what is the 2nd or 3rd thing he does??? Now, I vote for Obama but it takes more than one person to pass an initiative especially when the BIG people that donated money to your campaign all make well over 250K!

---

> and basically give the money to the people that don't pay taxes.

and how is he going to do that? what does that bromide even mean?

over 80% of the Federal government's budget is on auto-pilot -- it's social security, defense, and interest on the frickin' debt (THAT W DOUBLED IN THE PAST EIGHT YEARS). all of the Federal government's discretionary spending is a rounding error by comparison.

the issue isn't whether obama (or anybody else) is going to give my money to welfare queens -- it's whether the government is going to make even a passing attempt to collect as much as it spends.

W's dad tried to make that very point when he flip-flopped on "read my lips", and they pilloried him for it. clinton did it just a skoosh better four years later (got his tax plan through the senate by a single vote) -- widely regarded by policy wonks as the only time in my 30 years as a voter that we had anything approaching a responsible fiscal policy in washington.

oh, and i never said i didn't mind ... just that i understand it needs to be done.

---

Updated On: 11/4/08 at 04:11 PM

I'm sorry, but how was the 90s such a horrific decade for Broadway? Was there an off-season or two? Yes. Just like EVERY DECADE. Shows the 90s gave us:

The Grapes of Wrath
Lettice and Lovage
Once on This Island
Six Degrees of Separation
Lost in Yonkers
Miss Saigon
The Secret Garden
Will Rogers Follies
Dancing at Lughnasa
Crazy For You
Death and the Maiden
Conversations With My Father
Falsettos
Someone Who'll Watch Over Me
Fool Moon
Tommy
Blood Brothers
Kiss of the Spider Woman
Angels in America: Millenium Approaches
Laughter on the 23rd Floor
Angels in America: Perestroika
Twilight: Los Angeles, 1992
Beauty and the Beast
Passion
Sunset Boulevard
Love! Valour! Compassion!
Smokey Joe's Cafe
Moon Over Buffalo
Master Class
Seven Guitars
Bring in 'Da Noise/Bring in 'Da Funk
Rent
Buried Child
The Last Night of Ballyhoo
The Young Man From Atlanta
Titanic
The Life
Jekyll and Hyde
Side Show
The Scarlet Pimpernel
The Lion King
Ragtime
Art
The Beauty Queen of Leenane
Side Man
Parade Fosse
Not About Nightingales
Closer
The Wier
Amy's View
Putting it Together
Marie Christine

And that's not even counting the successful revivals. Yeah, the economy beat that decade all to hell.

Will Broadway see a decline in upper middle-class audiences. Perhaps, but probably not much. The difference could be made up for by the rest of the middle class and international tourists who would not be affected by the tax plan or by the upper class who can afford the premium seats of which the producers felt was such a great idea. Twice the price you used to pay for the same seats. I don't think any tax plan was responsible for that stroke of brilliance. Talk about alienating the middle-class audiences. They don't need Obama to make them feel like they can't afford the theatre.

---

Being someone who looks past all of the smoke and lights of Obama and his expensive campaign, I think his tax plan is going to hurt everyone...including Broadway.

Human Rights are the only thing that could convince me of a candidate.
Gay rights, NONE of the 4 main ticket names are in favor, so that's a dead issue (for now).
Women's rights, Roe V. Wade will never be overturned, so that also doesn't take issue. Even still, I'm Pro-Life with certain exceptions.

What's left for me?
I want more jobs, a defeat in the war without ending it too soon and risking another attack on my city, MY money in MY pocket and not going toward welfare or other people's healthcare. A strong economic plan. Access to alternate fuel sources.
Clear-cut choice was McCain for me.

Never ever did I think I would vote Republican as a registered Democrat; but there you have it.

Attack if you must. It's pointless and unnecessary being that I would not attack someone else for their choice of candidate.

---

Thats fine, I'm just saying that the government isn't considering that $250,000 may be all someone can spend to live their life. As I said in another thread, someone may be making $250,000 a year, have 3 kids in college, have a family member in the hospital, and live in New York? But with the tax they may not be able to afford that. Should they have to uproot their lives just so the government can be happy? Should little Jimmy not return to his sophomore year of college because his father can't afford anymore to send him there? I'm sure because his father makes $250,000 a year that Jimmy wouldn't qualify for financial aid. Should Grandma Gertrude have to be taken off of life support because her son can't afford the payments?

I understand that the government won't get involved in the specifics, but to increase the taxes only for a certain group is ridiculous. It's class separation.

---

Updated On: 11/4/08 at 05:57 PM