Government investment in the arts, such as music and theater is a waste of money. Governments must invest this money in public services instead.
To what extent do you agree with this statement?
All parts of aspects in this world are a thirst for government's investment, which determine the development of country. Spending money for the art activity like music and theater is not a prominent thing that government should do because that is only for entertainment. Some people argue that it could be better if government uses the money for public services; however, I argue that art gives several merits for the government from its tax. Therefore, this essay will discuss how government invests nation's wealth for both sides; public services and arts.
In this modern era, government undoubtedly plays the key part to the development of country for all sides. Arts are one of governments' investments. Not surprisingly government provides amount of money for the successful events of art such as music and theater. This may be only entertainment purposes but this would be benefits for government to gain money. In celebrating some events, the provider should pay a tax to the government. That is incomes for government. An obvious example that could be taken for this case is carrying out a concert which invites some overseas' artists. This is surely authentic that government spends much money for this event but on the other hand, this obtains a tax to government. The more viewers of concert come, the more profits government will get. To prevent the negative point of view of wasting money for the art events, government should pay attention more to the art creators because they can bring the nations' name.
However, public services take important role in the development of country. First, public service like transportation has many problems. This can be seen from how transportation is functioned by government. For example, in Asian countries such as Indonesia, still operate the proper transportation that makes the passenger feel uncomfortable. Second, the minimum number of health clinics especially in the coastal area of country needs more investment from government. To illustrate this, the poor still find difficulty to get medicine or doctor when they are getting sick. As the results, the amount money of country should be given for solving that problem of country in public services rather than to art services.
Ultimately, the arts are crucial to government to gain successful incomes by some events. Government should support the art events to attract young people to love the nation, and enhance the public services to be enjoyed by the societies. In my personal argument, both art and public services give some merits for the nation, and the problem is how the government could take a fair part from this case.
I can understand what you are arguing.Arts and public services are equally important.
But i think you can discuss the pros and cons more concretly and vividly.
I don't know whether these sentences are proper.
All parts of aspects in this world are a thirst for government's investment, which determine the development of country.
To prevent the negative point of view of wasting money for the art events, government should pay attention more to the art creators because they can bring the nations' name.
In my personal argument...can we say in this way?
Anyway,i'm not a expert.good luck!
how many 'government' that you already used here? try to use another word such as administration, or they or them which are related to the word 'government'
overall, you have written an interesting essay :)