Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians. Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Some believe that governments should financially support creative

artists

. Others think that these

artists

should be given financial support from alternative sources. I support the latter idea as the governments have more important issues to solve. On the one hand, the positive influence of famous painters and musicians on people is undeniable. They inspire and motivate millions of people around the world by their work and performance.

This

is why many think that they deserve more money apart from fame and respect.

However

, the path of an artist is unpredictable and, in my opinion, a person choosing

this

path should be ready for any circumstances including the lack of money.

For instance

, some popular

artists

at the early stages of their career had two jobs to cover basic needs.

On the other hand

, there are investors and wealthy fans of art that can be a good source of income for many creative

artists

.

Also

, with the help of the internet, finding the necessary number of supporters can be easier than ever before. From my perspective, social media

such

as Instagram, Telescope, YouTube and others can potentially bring more money than any government.

For example

, there is a number of rising musicians that earned more than a million dollars in one year with the help of a platform called Apple Music. In conclusion, while some people think that financial aid should be given to creative

artists

by the governments, I believe that they should be financed by alternative sources. I would recommend focusing on the creation of wide auditory on social platforms.