There is a widespread belief that the government should allocate more funds to embellish cities with artworks, such as paintings and sculptures, in order to improve the quality of urban living. In my view, I completely disagree with this assertion.
First and foremost, the installation of monuments not only necessitates significant financial resources but also substantial land allocation. Given the limited living space in urban areas, it is impractical to erect these monuments or statues. On the other hand, while paintings do not require land, the meticulous preservation of these artworks against weather conditions is a costly endeavor. Nevertheless, if it were not for a costly endeavour, these artworks could contribute to creating an aesthetically pleasing environment and fostering a sense of community among city residents. However, it is advisable for the authorities to direct their budget towards establishing sports centers or entertainment facilities to better meet the needs of urban inhabitants.
Furthermore, the government is confronted with a plethora of pressing issues, including infrastructure development, traffic congestion, and environmental pollution. The significant allocation required for building, upgrading, and maintaining transportation infrastructure is a prime example. The urgent need for medical facilities is heightened in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic. Additionally, the formulation and implementation of environmental policies are imperative in light of the escalating threat of climate change. Hence, these tasks should take precedence over the construction of monuments and paintings in order to enhance the overall quality of life in urban areas.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that the government should prioritize allocating resources to address other critical issues rather than invest in the erection of statues and paintings in order to enhance the quality of urban life.