In recent times, it is usually believe that the government should provides financial support to various artists, whereas others claim that such spending is a waste of public funds. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss both views before giving my opinion.
First and foremost, people should recognize the fact that art is essential for cultural identity. There is no denying that without funding, many artists would struggle to survival. It is obvious that art do not always generate immediate profitable, so government help is needed. For example, many historical paintings has been preserved only because of state grant. Furthermore, one further justification which should not be ignored here is that art improves mental well-being. This means that a society with music and poetry is more healthier than one without. A good case in point would be that during the pandemic, the government should subsidized digital concerts to keep people’s spirit high.
On the other hand, there are some reasons supporting the statement that this is a waste of money. It is important to remember that national budget are limited. In other words, money spend on poets is money taken away from hospital or schools. For instance, were the government to spend all it money on art, the infrastructure will collapse.
In conclusion, while some people argue that funding artists is a waste, I am quite in favor of the idea saying that art is a public good. However, had the government ignored the arts entirely, our culture would be much poorer. Each of us should consider carefully before reaching a final decision on this issue.