/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>statue profile pic
Opinion immediately discarded.

>>6798343
>statue profile pic

>>6798343
pretty sure its some rich guy economic trick shit like buying gold i.e. turning your $$ into assets
maybe someone smarter than me can explain

>>6798343
money laundering. same principle as with the mobile phone gacha games or NFTs.

>have 100 millions
>tell to a guy to create fake business (gacha game, "art", NFT, whatever)
>pay the guy 100 millions for whatever he is selling
>the guy does tax optimization and pays 1 million in taxes in some tax haven like Ireland
>the guy then gives you back 100 - 1 (guys share) - 1 (taxes) = 98 millions, perfectly washed, taxed and clean

Normal wagies have to wageslave and their income (+social +retirement) taxes usually take from 30 to 60% and they will never earn a single million in their whole life. But you as criminal just laundered 100 millions for a mere 2% "tax" and you are set for life.

PRO tip: in UK anyone can register a business with a fake name and fake address. It is one of the last countries on earth where there is NO VERIFICATION needed to register a business. So you can skip the middle guy and open the business under name John Smith yourself.
>inb4 banks
Bankers are NOTORIOUS for covering up money laundering, in fact they LOVE money laundering and actively help it, because they feed off the banking fees, they get few percent from your millions.

The statue doesn't have glowing eyes I don't know if I can trust this man

>>6798343
The exact definition of art is that it doesn’t have economic value. Wealthy people know this while midwits prefer industrial artslop and scoff when they see art that doesn’t have an associated product they can consoom

>>6798343
Because, by buying a painting at one hundred million, it more or less makes that painting worth that price, regardless of the skills displayed or lack of reputation the artist has.

Now the buyer has a Hundred Million dollar asset he can move around easily.

Granted, I'm probably over simplifying it, anyone can simply think of how they'd launder, but the actual practice is probably infinitely more complex.

All this said, I don't think the question statue dude asked was unreasonable, why is that shit worth > $100 MILLION DOLLARS? It doesn't even seem to be of good quality compared to it's other abstract peers.

>>6798343
You get in a lower tax bracket or some shit yeah? Dont think thats money laundering

>>6798530
What color is your Bugatti?

>>6798343
Watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw5kme5Q_Yo

>>6798343
It's always some tradcath "western civilization has fallen" larper that does this, and none of their arguments would apply less if the artwork was "le realistic historical masterpiece", but they'd still shut up because it isn't actually a problem the art is expensive, their problem is that they don't like it.

>They use it for tax deduction
Also doable with realistic art. Not doable in most countries outside US and UK anyway, because there are caps that are like 1k€/year. Even in US/UK, the most expensive pieces - like that painting by De Kooning - are very rarely donated. In either case, the donation strategy is old and less practiced these days - it was mostly patched in 2006.
>They use it for money laundering
They also use antiques, realistic art, expensive watches, three-letter agencies, and literal laundromats for this.
>B-but abstract art bad, there's no reason to make it other than these reasons
Despite there being a bunch of artists making a living selling abstract art for less than $5000/work, with slim chances it will ever appreciate in value, and without enough instrumental value to be used for either money laundering or tax evasion, often in countries where these things are more regulated. Abstract art also exist in murals, which can't be sold, yet people commission abstract artists to do them anyway.
>BUT LE JOOOWS

>>6798343
its not money laundering its just the state of the art business, the people who run it are famous for hating beauty and talent & instead to choose to promote work such as this, an actual portrait by a well respected 'artist' probably worth 10s of thousands

>>6799215
US laws actually favor investing in ugly art, because if you get classified as an investor instead of collector you enjoy various tax benefits. One way to do this has been communicating your willingness to buy art that goes against your personal preferences (and leaving a paper trail on this).

>>6798556
>? It doesn't even seem to be of good quality compared to it's other abstract peers

that's the point, abstract art prices are independent of other pieces and market trends because there's no power level leaderboard driving the prices the way there is for the stuf we plebeians buy.

>This guy drew this thing for 400$
>I'm about a fifth as good as he is
>I should charge 80$ for similar pieces
is a somewhat decent reasoning when it comes to porn commissions on Twitter but if you start letting people say

>I charge 80$
>I mog Jackson Pollock so fucking hard I'd need to open a new field of proctology to explain how deep my balls are in his digestive tract
then the conclusion is either
>I now charge 8 million dollars
or
>Jackson Pollock's work is 3$ in Robux

, and the art market turns from somewhat stable to Bitcoin tier as people endlessly argue their capital is worth 80 million and not 70 because the 90 million painter it's pitted against is actually shit and NGMI

>>6799209
>b-b-but muh abstract modern art!
That shit's literally figurative. It's also utter shit.

>>6798343
because the cia literally admits they invented garbage abstract art and used it as a means of money laundering? like its literally admitted to as how they get black book money and fund projects and known by everyone that even bothers to look into it. you can take a painting on a plane and leave the country and then transfer it to someone. you can have something painted by a retard, have your friend value it at millions and then auction it. you cant put millions in a briefcase and take on a plane out of country. its literally illegal. you hav eto declare it, explain what you are doing with the money and get permission and so much paperwork that traces where the money came from and going and so on. they dont want a papertrail. they dont want to explain it. thats the whole point.

>>6799237
>US laws actually favor investing in ugly art, because if you get classified as an investor instead of collector
yeah that's bs

>>6799347
>because the cia literally admits they invented garbage abstract art
wrong again, they didn't invent anything, they supported it as an example of american freedom of expression during the cold war in relation to the soviet union's state mandated social realism commie propaganda art, if you painted like jackson pollock under stalin he'd send you to the gulag

>>6798348
>>6798350
No draws with shitty taste

>>6798343
>Why would anyone launder money at such high profile happenings like art auctions?
Because it's legal and the powers that be want it to remain that way so they have no interest in mending the loopholes that allow you to money launder via art.

>>6798343
>>6798343
"..with his meaningless pictures had entered into a conspiracy with millionaires to make poor people feel stupid."

>Be someone with lots of money
>Be someone with shit taste
>Buys shit painting with lots of money
>Gets accused of money laundering
Pain peko

>>6798343
i dont like its use of color but the shape language, face is hysterical. if i was rich id buy it too. id also buy twitter and ban dweeb accounts like this one, reddit or even this site is better suited for roman statue dick sucking

>>6800170
"had" doing a lot of work here buddy

>>6798530
>gives back 100 - 1
you know nothing about accounting and related party transactions, all these shit appears in the book and transactions of this magnitude are documented by third party cpa in the most absurd and redundant way possible.

>>6799347
>the cia literally admits they invented garbage abstract art and used it as a means of money laundering
Where did they admit this

>>6798343
>caring about what other people do with their money
stay poor loser

>>6798343
Art has no intrinsic value. It costs as much as people dealing in art business tell you it cost.

>>6798343
Stop asking questions goy and delete this antisemitism immediately.

>>6800170
Seems like he just hates art