It is often argued that governments could invest more money in presenting some artworks in public places. While many people think that it might have several benefits, from my perspective, it seems to me that it is a negative development for several reasons.
A valid reason is that many people could not be interested in art, and those paintings, crafts and sculptures might not be beneficial to them. To illustrate, many citizens may not devote any time to seeing or enjoying the exhibited arts that their country provides in parks, trains and metro stations as well as squares. Thus, many could propose that authorities might invest more in other sectors that could be crucial for the citizens. These fields usually include education and health systems but they can also contain other sectors, such as planting new trees, providing more kids areas, and constructing community clubs.
Another reason to consider is that many people believe that these valuable works of art should not be kept in public places but they can be exhibited in galleries. This could be due to the fact that these works could be mistreated by many youngsters in case they are left in streets and parks since the young can write and draw on them. Moreover, keeping such works in exhibitions might attract those who are fond of art and value such kinds of sculpture and paintings. These galleries could also be more beneficial for the governments as they might gain profit from the entrance fees. These earnings can assist the authorities to invest in other high-priority sectors.
By way of conclusion, despite the fact that artworks could be important as a cultural value of any country, I hold the notion that governments should invest their money in other critical sectors and preserve scratchers and paintings in galleries for those who are interested in them.