FTS :

37% of classical music listeners in the UK are aged 16-34, debunking the "graying audience" myth

I'm not certain how that jibes with the common meme that Boomers sucked up all the money, and GenZ people are poor.

One-third of classical music fans live in households earning over $100,000 annually

Which is another way of saying two-thirds are living in households making under $100,000 annually

From the other report, I was gobsmacked when they wrote:

Proportionately fewer baby boomers have advanced into top professional and high-salaried positions, despite their advanced degrees.

Wait... what? the boomers, who are claimed to hoard all their money to themselves, won't retire because they refuse to give up their big money, and aer generally the cause of every problem on earth is that? I've been told by millennial and Genders that they can hardly wait for us to die so they stand a chance of fixing everything. I mean, we are hated. That's a shock.

What I am seeing, from the scope of those two reports/studies is that there are wide demographics interested in the Arts, and I have no doubt that interest in the arts is an enhancement to life. I do not see that the poor are excluded. I do not see that the poor have zero time to appreciate art. But that's just me.

"Chromebook" sounded kind of cool.

"GoogleBook" just sounds odd.

Thanks - reading them now.

You are invoking a meme. I do have an art minor, so I've seen a lot of artists and people who are interested in art. There are many artists who remain poor to work their craft. They are not stressed about that - it is their choice.

There are wealthy people who are not interested in Art. As well, more than a few who are both artists and wealthy

But can you address how a poor person is kept from accessing art on the internet? Even places like Facebook have a lot of art on them. Not many people are bereft of a smartphone or computer.

I've been very poor, yet always been interested in art. I work many hours a week now (although slowed a bit since retirement) , more hours than when I was poor. I have money. I really think a person is interested in art or they are not. Making it into a class warfare issue is specious as far as I'm concerned.

But this is Slashdot, where virtue is inversely proportional to wealth. 8^)

Oh - averages, Can you give me those statistics? I get a lot of Artists exposing inequalities between rich and poor from searches. So perhaps rather than talk about statistical averages, and making it a wealthy versus poor battle - and let us face it, all of that reads a whole lot like good old class warfare - we might look into the differences between those people of modest means who are interested in art, and those of modest means who have no interest in art.

In addition, perhaps looking into the differences between wealthy people who are interested in art, and those who are not could be interesting. Because there are wealthy people who aren't interested.

Because if we just make this another have versus have not thing, it will deteriorate quickly.

You'd have to get a load of Bull manure for the last one.

You have an interesting outlook. People with money and apparently a lot of free time, are living in a utopia of stress free living.

Perhaps your outlook and narrative shows where your priorities are. As I noted before to others, are you prevented from accessing the wealth of art on the Internet?

In reality, it isn't that there are reasons to find people with incredible amounts of money to be problematic.

But it also becomes problematic when it becomes an obsession, when all you see is reasons to spread your hate and turn every topic into class warfare.

While it makes for narrative validation to yet again turn people with money into your mortal enemy, do you have a computer? Do you have a cell phone?

Tell me comrade, are you blocked from accessing art sites on them?

Comrade, do not make the mistake of thinking that you need huge amounts of spare time and wealth to appreciate art. You can do it on your digital devices instead of watching reality TV. And museums are all over the place. What is more, you can even make your own art.

But it is easier to look at everything as your class warfare outlook - Maybe class warfare is your art form.

As a person of the class that you hate, I make the time to engage with the arts. And I did it when I was poor too.

Not everything is about your class warfare, comrade.

This has my rapt attention! My hearing loss is accompanied by that nasty cocktail party effect. Along with tinnitus. My noggin processes all sounds equally, so the background noise is given the same importance as whoever I'm talking to. And that doesn't work.

Hearing aids can help a little, but after about 15 minutes, I'm exhausted. If this works, I'll sign right up.

Something similar happened with the Marcellus shale natgas drilling in my area. The gas companies improved the back roads they drove on, and in one case, repaved a whole length of highway after their very heavy equipment made a mess of it. The highway wasn't constructed for it (it was a road through an area where big trucks never went unless they took a wrong turn. The new length of highway is now sturdy, and very nice.

I actually had to be escorted through the area right after they wrecked the road. It was interesting to say the least. But as noted, they've owned their damage, and actually improved things.

We need the data centers as highest priority, good citizens, Time to go get fitted with your stillsuit, as public water gets shut off next week.

It is a very interesting thesis, and yes, early exposure is important for most people. Tail and the dog indeed. On a personal level, and coming from abject poverty, and having zero control over my life as a child, it would appear that my upbringing should leave me completely uninterested in art, yet my sisters are actively involved in art, my older was a art major, and makes jewelry, and my younger is what would be best described as a music curator, and I myself am a musician, and do photography (much of it as a career, the rest as expression) and am intensely interested in the visual arts. I also have relatives who were in similar straits, but are involved in art via producing or just interest.

And there lies the issue I struggle with. Is socioeconomic status (assuming one believes that money and social status is some kind of determinate of something) learned or a natural state of things? I chose not to accept what society apparently decided was my role in life, and my interest in art is intrinsic to me. Why would others accept that they had no interest because they were poor, or born "on the wrong side of the tracks" as they say?

And it is something I have never been able to figure out. At what point does the individual accept either responsibility for their trajectory, or decide that they are put down by society and have no choices? It is a difficult thing to discuss, as so often it turns into politics.

As an aside, my very humble beginnings and rising above them results in me treating everyone with respect, although I have little tolerance for asshats.

So ... kind of like something that would happen at what was, or should be, a non-profit?

Probably not, but hey, worth checking, right? Otherwise, people are just spouting BS if they say they know how the trial is going.