It is a widely argument that regime should lower the maintenance of arts, for boosting the education in the state. I completely disagree with this argument. Cultural heritage and history is as essential as education.
To begin with, cultures own history is a perfect source for future generations. These physical ancient studies that located in some libraries might help with accomplishing great innovations. To give further information, children who are more dominant to art could have a great source of inspiration by these old arts or amphitheaters. However, education and arts should allocate the same amount of money. In additionally, Despite education is teaching kids how to be more logical or mathematical towards to their subjects, arts around the state might be great source for creativity and confident. What we see is, both categories has their advantages, and one other should not be shown greater.
Furthermore, These cultural structures or painting from old eras are not only for pushing and giving confidence for children. These remarkable human-made buildings are great profit for the country. For example, countries such as Italy and Turkey is a perfect example for tourism around the globe. For instance, Italians have the Colosseum and Turks have Bosporus Strait or Hagia Sophia. Thus, these can be a huge opportunity for governments to grab money from tourists, and spent this to expand the country in different ways.
To conclude, both arts and education have their own positive ways. So, by lowering budget of arts and increasing the education is not entirely fair. Countries’ culture and history could be helpful in many ways for children and for government.