It is undeniable that demand for artists is increasing in the contemporary times. Some school of thoughts are claiming that spending money for the artists is not profitable. While, rest of them believe that it is not waste of time and economy. I will discuss both views further in the ensuing paragraphs.
To commence with a former view, since art contribute to society’s cultural and economic value, spending money on creators cannot be considered as loose of money. To be more precise, artists need a support to innovate art, for that reason they can introduce country’s culture. Take the National Gallery of Modern Art in Delhi, for example, has gained a significant amount of popularity in recent years, and billions of tourists are visiting to view and purchase art, generation substantial revenue for the government. This would not be possible without the contributions of artists. Moreover, preserving country’s culture and history requires the expertise and creativity of artists. Thus, it does not cost money or efforts to investing them.
On the contrary, another view should not be ignored completely. There are significant challenges that other people are facing today, such as poverty and environmental problems. For instance, in many cities in India, individuals struggle to find at least basic necessities such as meals and shelters, the government should address this critical situation on prior. To prevent this higher authority should enhance infrastructure, hospitals, and schools rather than spending on creators. Hence, on the majority side, artists are not contributing enough in country’s development, therefore government should focus on other situations.
In conclusion, although artists offers cultural and historical value, the government need to pay attention and invest on other enhancements.