The government funding for art and culture
Others think supporting cultural activities may be beneficial for the population and the culture. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about the effectiveness of financial supporting for artistic and cultural activities. In my view, the benefits of spending money on art and culture are more significant than the downsides.
On the one hand, it cannot be denied that financing for art and culture activities may occupy a large amount of money that the government can spend on other more important needs. It is extremely pricey to acquire good specimens of art and culture in order to enhance the quality of collections of museums and art galleries open to the public. Therefore, government should allocate their money on education, health care and transportation which would more directly impact on the lives of the population. By this way, citizens have been provided opportunities not only to enhance their knowledge but also to raise a higher standard of living by modern medical facilities and developed infrastructure.
On the other hand, I would agree with those who believe that allocating subsidy on art and culture is highly meaningful. The main reason for this view is that national budget for the development and sustenance of arts helps boost the country's economy. The more traditional features are displayed in each artworks, the more tourists from all over the world are attracted to the art galleries, which can generate more benefits and revenue in return. Another reason for this opinion is that it is no doubt that art is a supplement for human soul which are effective sources of venting our frustration and depression as well as improving our emotional intelligence.
In conclusion, I would argue that the advantages of spending money on art and culture do outweigh the disadvantages.
Others think supporting cultural activities may be beneficial for the population and the culture. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about the effectiveness of financial supporting for artistic and cultural activities. In my view, the benefits of spending money on art and culture are more significant than the downsides.
On the one hand, it cannot be denied that financing for art and culture activities may occupy a large amount of money that the government can spend on other more important needs. It is extremely pricey to acquire good specimens of art and culture in order to enhance the quality of collections of museums and art galleries open to the public. Therefore, government should allocate their money on education, health care and transportation which would more directly impact on the lives of the population. By this way, citizens have been provided opportunities not only to enhance their knowledge but also to raise a higher standard of living by modern medical facilities and developed infrastructure.
On the other hand, I would agree with those who believe that allocating subsidy on art and culture is highly meaningful. The main reason for this view is that national budget for the development and sustenance of arts helps boost the country's economy. The more traditional features are displayed in each artworks, the more tourists from all over the world are attracted to the art galleries, which can generate more benefits and revenue in return. Another reason for this opinion is that it is no doubt that art is a supplement for human soul which are effective sources of venting our frustration and depression as well as improving our emotional intelligence.
In conclusion, I would argue that the advantages of spending money on art and culture do outweigh the disadvantages.