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

Policymakers provide a

lot

of financial assistance to creative people. While some believe that artists can make people happy with their

work but

Accept comma addition

work, but

I believe mitigating people's basic needs should be prioritized over financing on artists. Artists are always people who try to make people feel good. But by being a professional artist like painter, musician, and magician, people earn a

lot

less. So, governments finance a

lot

of organizations that deal with artists. A survey published in "Monthly Charu" revealed that music teacher has least average pay scale among all the professions.

However

, I believe that other sectors that deal with basic human needs like food, clothing, housing,

education

, and health service availability need more financing. Some argue that basic human needs should be fulfilled

first

Accept comma addition

first, then

then

financing

on

Suggestion

for

the other sector may come

in

Suggestion

into

action. When basic biological needs are not accessible to 60% of people in the world, it is luxurious to spend resources on art or culture. In Somalia, the

Education

Ministry decided to spend

it's

of a thing, of it; possessive form of "it"

its

38% of the budget in art

education

while seven out of ten children

has

Suggestion

have

no access to

education

. So, mitigating the major needs

i

objective form of "I"

me

I

.e., food,

education

,

etc

continuing in the same way

etc.

should be the priority rather than spending resources music production. In conclusion, governments around the world can spend a

lot

of

artists but

Accept comma addition

artists, but

they should be aware of the fact that basic human needs are the

first

thing to look at and mitigating issues relating to

this

should be prioritized over any other thing.