Governments give a lot of support to artists, even though some people think it is a waste of money that could have been used elsewhere. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some would argue that artists should not be supported by the state because supporting them is just a waste of financial resources and the government should invest it into more useful things. While some say that artists do everything for

themselves not

Accept comma addition

themselves, not

for the

country

, I believe that they are the brand ambassador of the

country

. On the one hand, artists perform to earn the fame and money for themselves, they do not care about the

country

.

Thus

, the government should spend that money into the things that can bring more benefits in the

future

rather spending it on artists.

Such

as, reforms in education system may bring revolutionary change in the

future

of the

country

.

For example

, a recent research revealed that 80% of the developing countries can secure their

future just

Accept comma addition

future, just

by investing more money in their education sector.

However

, I do not agree with

this

view because it is not the proper way to secure the

countries

Suggestion

country's

future

.

On the other hand

, artists are the brand ambassador of the

country

. They represent the soft image of the

country

to the world. And people know their

country

just by knowing them.

For instance

, Atif Aslam is a leading singer in Pakistan and people know him all over the world and because of knowing him, they got to know that there is a

country

exist named Pakistan. I believe that the state should encourage artists, because they have the power that can attract people from all over the globe towards the

country

. In conclusion,

although

many say that

artist

Suggestion

the artist

ought not be encouraged by the state, I would say because they represent the

country

’s positive image to the world,

thus

, they must be appreciated by the government.