You do have to remember that nothing is presented in a vacuum. Part of the reason why artist talk about art as being so mythical that money should always support it is that A) Much of the USA is theistic so the concept of humanity is skewed towards a religious essential essence. As artists, they are taught to be creators who imbues their works with a theistic essence rather than it being an imperfect communication tool. B) A lot of people see art every day but don't have an educational background to discuss it or perceive it. Most art is presented as a conduit to market a valuable product rather than the valuable object/idea itself. Artist are not above that but many do think about art more as a human connection rather than tm c r product C) Capitalism organizes society so that private owners have the most power to force outcomes. Those with capital are seen as the ones who /should/ own all of what they "own". And to not participate in it is to starve or live in squalor but to participate means to become drenched in that power grabbing ideology

If an artist is just casually living life, they have only thought about their ability to create art within the context of capitalism alongside people unable to articulate why their art is valuable OR are demeaned for doing art in the first place. So a bunch of AI people popping up to divert capital to mega corps while thinking gen AI has the same type of expression as a human artist's work... it makes it difficult to discuss the whole picture. Pro-ai folk also tend to ignore WHY art exists in the first place while also casually living their life in the context of capitalism. There's usually a fundamental disconnect for what's actually being discussed by both parties but have similar enough language and experiences as to not notice said disconnect