In the modern era, the issue of that government overspending money on the arts has generated considerable debate. While one school of thought suggests that government is wasting money on the arts, other contend that government should invest in arts, such as exhibitions, sculptures, paintings, etc. This essay will examine both perspectives before presenting my own reasoned opinion.
On the one hand, there are compelling arguments to support the notion that government should spend money on the arts. The primary justification for this viewpoint is that maintaining arts rise education of the population and it is often asserted that definitely arts objects provide positive influence on teens. For instance, according to BBS news 90% of artists are from countries when better develop arts and culture.
On the other hand, a contrasting perspective holds that overspending money on the arts is worse than spending elsewhere. The most significant factor underpinning this argument is the observation that there are a lot of badly off families that need to any assistance and also ill children who right now need to expensive medicines. This is particularly evident in low-tech countries and third world countries.
From my perspective, I am inclined to agree with the a latter view because I assume that a lot of people suffer of poverty and some illnesses and money of support the arts can donate there people.
In conclusion, while both views present valid points, particularly concerning spending money for the art and donate people in need, I maintain the view that better donating moneys than spending on the arts.