As societies grow and economies evolve, the ways in which governments allocate their financial resources have attracted considerable attention. Some believe that investments should be diverted to essential public services like education and healthcare, while others argue that cultural heritage equally deserve to receive the financial aid. Although I acknowledge the significance of arts and culture in people’s lives, I am convinced that governments’ money should primarily be allocated toward the public sector.
Critics of this trend often worry that the scarcity of financial assistance regarding arts and national heritage may lead to the loss of cultural identity. Without modernizing museums or galleries, they risk becoming unpopular choice among young people, especially in this fast-paced world. This, in turn, can undermine a sense of identity in citizens, reducing the overall knowledge and awareness about their own country. While this argument holds a certain degree of weight, it is important to take personal agenda into account. Parents and teachers may spark children’s interest in their own country’s history and culture by creating proper environments where they can learn new concepts about their hometown. In Germany, for instance, educational settings and households were the main reason of the increase in cultural awareness among students.
Once the opposing view has been sufficiently addressed, the focus can now shift toward more compelling reasons of investing in the public institutions. Foremost among them is the significance of education for both society and country. Some schools and university settings, especially in developing countries, still lack adequate study materials, professionals with expertise, and proper extracurricular activities. With such shortages in education sector, the authorities may unable to finance cultural legacy, while addressing these problems. Therefore, the country should prioritize schools subsidizes because they can not only broader students’ horizons but also open doors for future careers. Consequently, this would lead to country’s further development and a better quality of life for individuals themselves. Take the survey in the UK for example; the literacy rates among secondary school students were reported to increase after the governments’ investments into special educational equipment and post-school activities.
Equally crucial are financial sources directed toward healthcare. With the massive urbanization and development of new constructions, people started facing more health issues due to air pollution and stressful lifestyles. However, not all hospital settings may provide citizens with top-notch service and proper care, particularly those in low-income nations. As a result, this might contribute to a reduction of life expectancy within people as well as dissatisfaction with life itself. This may affect the county’s development and reputation on a global scale, contributing to a massive migration and negative association with the country. Therefore, investing and improving hospital facilities is vital for achieving long-term social and economic progress
In conclusion, while cultural heritage is important, it, by no means, is the most significant aspect of the nation’s development. Hence, finances should mainly target education and medical care sectors which directly affect and determine the country’s future.