Millions of taxpayers aid Quentin Tarantino’s last film.

Don’t You Own a TV?

As the father of ‌a large ⁢family, ​I often get remarks made ​to me‍ at the ​grocery​ store, usually they go something ​like this:

“Are⁤ they all⁣ yours?” or “Don’t you know what causes that?”

However, my favorite‍ by far is, ‍“Don’t you own a TV?”

That one always⁣ baffles me. First of all, I ⁢don’t⁤ know about you,⁣ but the process ⁢involved in making‍ a child ​is infinitely more enjoyable than binge-watching the latest true-crime drama on ⁣Hulu.

But more than this, the response demonstrates​ a weird reversal⁣ of​ social priorities. After⁤ all,​ wouldn’t it be better for ⁣young people to be having ​more⁤ children than watching the next Marvel‍ movie?

Some countries, like⁣ Hungary, ⁢think procreation is so ⁢important⁣ it encourages​ couples ⁢to have children with tax credits.

In the United⁤ States, tax credits are going to director ⁤Quentin‌ Tarantino to make another vulgar and ⁣gory film.

As reported by The Hollywood Reporter;

“The state’s film office on Friday ⁣said‌ that‌ California’s Film ​& TV tax credit program will welcome a trio of feature films, including Quentin Tarantino’s The Movie Critic, as well​ as a roster of 13 independent films. (No studio is currently attached to The Movie Critic yet.) …Netflix ($20 million)⁢ is the ‍only major studio nabbing credits in this allotment​ for an untitled film. Lionsgate ($21.1 million) led the ⁤way in the previous⁢ round of incentives and ​Netflix and Warner Bros. in the previous ‍four​ before ‌that.”

You ⁤heard correctly, the state ⁢of ⁢California, which has the fifth highest debt among U.S. states (behind Democratic ‌bastions⁣ New⁣ York,⁢ New Jersey, Illinois ‌and Massachusetts), and the highest taxes, is⁢ expanding that debt and putting those​ tax dollars to good use in promoting ‍yet ⁣another Hollywood monstrosity.

Now, one might think that ‌this would ‌be a good way⁢ to get business,⁢ in the ‌sense that some towns⁣ and cities could use the jobs a movie-making endeavor could provide, as well as ‍a tourism boost that might be generated by being featured in ‌a‌ film. However, that justification would be a bit of a stretch in ​California, the ‍home of Hollywood.

After all, isn’t ‌tourism a big reason why ⁢visitors go to California anyway?

Now‍ another argument might be ⁤that tax credits could help out a small business,⁤ like an upstart director and a new production company.

However, one only has to take a glance at Tarantino’s net worth (approximately $120 million) to ‌realize that “welfare” ‍is the last thing this dude needs.

But for what the director has already​ announced will be his final film, according to The Hollywood Reporter, welfare is exactly what his work⁢ is going to get. The production‌ company behind ⁣“The Last Critic,” L. Driver Productions, is‌ due for $20.2 million in state money, according to ‌The Hollywood ⁤Reporter.

Now, there​ are those⁤ who‍ would ​say to all‌ of ‍this: “Who cares?”

After all, Tarantino films do have a real audience, and do have‌ artistic qualities to them,‍ even if ⁣I find⁣ them a bit over-the-top personally.⁢ But ⁣hey, they aren’t for everyone. Some people like⁢ VW⁤ Beetles and⁤ mayo on their hot dogs. (Who am I ⁢to judge?)

Regardless of how they feel⁤ about ⁢Tarantino’s ‍work, however, millions of taxpayers ⁣are going‌ to be kicking in money to​ support it, compliments ⁢of the California Film ⁢Commission.

But at some point, when⁤ you have an​ actual demographic⁤ crisis, a drug crisis, and the erosion of those fundamental religious and‍ family values that make the building of a successful society‍ possible, it seems a ‍bit preposterous to take tax ​dollars from an⁢ already overburdened public and ⁤give‍ it​ to millionaires so they can⁢ make more crap‌ in order​ that people can continue to lose‍ brain cells in front of ‌a screen.

I have already‍ mentioned Hungary as an example, which has been inspiring many on the populist ‌right ​for encouraging the country’s birth rate⁤ and marriage through tax incentives.

There⁣ are those​ on ​the populist right who love this. ‌There are those ‍on the libertarian right who do not. ‍And there are conservative positions in between. But let us consider‌ the notion⁢ in principle: If ​you are going​ to use tax‍ dollars for‍ something to‍ help a⁤ society ​turn around from a bad ⁤place, ‍wouldn’t this ‍be a good ⁤place to start?

Indeed, a country concerned enough about⁢ the institution‌ of the family to levy funds for its support seems to indicate that at​ least the leadership of that nation has ‌its head screwed on correctly.

What does this say about ‌the leadership ​of California? You would think, with⁤ needles and ‌feces ‍ making a national embarrassment ⁤of one of its⁢ major cities, perhaps ​that money could be better spent elsewhere?

We need to turn⁢ around our society and we need​ to​ do so by making‌ changes ⁤at home. If we don’t want our tax⁢ dollars to go to⁢ Hollywood ‌elites we need to stop supporting their drivel to the point that they think such an expense is justifiable.‌ Spend that time making more God-fearing Americans instead.

In doing my part, ⁢I ‍know exactly what I will say next time someone asks me when they look at my brood of Christian kiddos in the check-out line:

“Don’t you own a ⁣TV?”

I’m⁢ going to say:

“No, I clearly have better things to ‍do.”

Maybe if we all do that,‌ California will finally get the hint.

The post Quentin Tarantino’s Final Film ⁣Will Get Made⁤ Thanks to the Help of Millions⁤ of Taxpayers ⁢appeared first on The Western Journal.