.Some people think the government funding should not be used for supporting 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

It is an irrefutable fact that art portrays the history of a nation beautifully. Many countries spend a considerable amount of funds on supporting the

arts

and

culture

.

Although

, a segment of society is convinced that taxpayers money should be spent on more pressing issues

such

as education and medical care.

However

, both points of view need to be addressed before formulating an opinion. The proponents of funding the

arts

and

culture

believe that it helps to nurture patriotism and harmony among the population.

As a result

, the nation's sense of tightness can be enhanced. Take,

for example

, China. It spends a large amount of money to restore the lost heritage before the Cultural Revolution.

Secondly

, without

government

funding, some artists cannot earn their living. Without

government

funding, these talented people would not be able to work and inspire others.

Nonetheless

, art and

culture

cannot affect the economy and improve living standards. There are more vital sectors that need funding. The

government

can fund healthcare, road infrastructure and education.

This

in turn can facilitate the development of a healthy nation, improve the economy and, substantially, living conditions. In my opinion, fulfilment of basic needs is more important than promoting national heritage and

culture

.

For instance

, a sick and uneducated person cannot fully value a piece of art. To conclude, despite the fact that

arts

and

culture

promote harmony in society, I personally believe that the

government

should not fund the

arts

.

Instead

, money should be spent on more crucial sectors of the economy that can improve the quality of residents' lives.