The views on the creative artists’ disbursement aids between the government and the other charities or organizations is controversial due to the lack of financial help in this specific profession, which is the art industry. In my opinion, innovative artists should be provided a large amount of funding by the governments, but some fractions should be allocated by the other art institutional organisations.
Many artists , including painters and musicians, should be funded fully by the government because of their wide range of different sources compared to other enterprises. By doing so, experienced generations of artists will periodically give training to the thriving individuals. The more material resources there are , the more creative and enthusiastic the artists become. For example, when the government assist finanical aids to the outstanding artists for the vocal or painting class for a certain period of time , they will have opportunities to apply in real life.
On the other hand, small or medium organisations can only partially backing these artists due to the limited amount of money. Even if they want to consistently aid them for their welfare, they cannot cover lots of people. Consequently, in the worst-case scenario, the establishment cannot withstand the long-term survival and will fall into bankruptcy.
Another way to give example is that the artists themselves earn money by teaching beginners with decent amount of class fee. However, they might end up swtiching career, instead of pursuing on their dreams.
In conclusion, in my point of view, union funding is enough to provide the artists’ social welfare and their professions, while other organisations have limited amounts of income sources.