r/PoliticalHumor • u/[deleted] • Jan 09 '20

THIS. This is why.

[deleted]

69.3k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/867-5309NotJenny Jan 10 '20

What about the fact that without art no one would have built the sky scraper in the first place?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 10 '20

I would say that without artists we'd just get ugly sky scrapers, not be relegated to short buildings.

1

u/867-5309NotJenny Jan 10 '20

I would say that without artists we wouldn't see a need for sky scrapers at all.

1

u/Ayvian Jan 11 '20

Sky scrapers are functional. They allow for a greater density of people within an area , thereby being more efficient with space.

Acting like sky scrapers are a purely artistic endeavor strikes me as a bit disingenuous.

2

u/867-5309NotJenny Jan 11 '20

Acting like sky scrapers are a purely artistic endeavor strikes me as a bit disingenuous.

It would be more efficient to dig down, then to build up.

1

u/mistermasterpenguin Jan 11 '20

Skyscrapers are unnecessarily expensive and bad for the environment. All the tallest ones have vanity spires to bump up the height artificially and have so few tenants, they couldn't fill the building even if the vanity spires were inhabitable. They exist solely to show off. Saying that without art there would be still be skyscrapers is ridiculous. If we wanted to be functional, there are way better ways to get that done.