Governments are tought to allocate more money to teach science rather than other diciplines to progress. To some extent, I agree with this view, but there are other aspects to take into account.
One key reason for prioritizing science subjects is that they help societies develop. That is to say, when young people are encouraged to learn scientific subjects, they will able to find solutions for major problems in their community. For example, treatments for various illnesses such as cancer or diabetes can be achieved by scientists in the field of medicine. As a result, with the solution to health-related issues, people can focus on other areas of development such as technology and architecture of cities. If it were not for science, these major challenges would hinder human beings from further development. Given that, science subjects should be funded by governments.
However, another idea against this is that not all people are to become scientists. In other words, some people are driven creating art, while others can be motivated in sport and this helps societies develop. Consequently, people might enjoy watching sports such as football whereas art can also provide an escape from everyday life. Without such sport or art, many people would be left unemployed and societies in general would lead a dull life. Therefore, schools and educators should pay equal attention to various subjects, enabling people to pursue their dream jobs.
In conclusion, although science helps in areas such as medicine or technology, it is impossible to image life without art and sport as they provide job for many people while making our lives meaningful and colorful. Therefore, governing bodies should direct equal amount of money in all subjects at schools and universities.