On the one hand opponents of government financially support creative artists often argue that the fund should be prioritized for areas that yield more immediate and tangible results such as healthcare and education. Offering money to musicians and painters , some say, is luxurious and only suitable for developed country. They claim that govern’s coffers to them would come with censorship which is restricting artists’ creative freedom and accomplishing the value of produced artworks. Therfore, it is suguested that they should left working independently and privatelywhile producing products
On the other hand, I side with people who claim that susidizing artists is beneficial. Artists play a significant role in creating pieces of works that showcase cultural idenity and values of a nation. However, true arts are not commercially appealling so there are many artists who are talented but struggle financally lacking the resource to focus on their work. Susidizes from the government would enable these individuals to work and dedicate entirely to their craft, adding to the country cultural heritage.
In conclusion, while there are various reasons hindering artists from receiving state money such as priortizing other fields and fear of restriction in artists creativity due to censorship. Annually giving them funds would have them having free from financial strain to produce best artworks for the sake of the country