Government investment in the art, such as music and theatre, is waste of money. Government must invest this money in public services instead. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Nowadays, more and more people observe what their governments are investing in. Many of them argue a choice of

investment

between arts or public

services

. In my humble opinion, I agree that

investment

in public

services

is a better choice. Not only can it reduce the expenditure on living, but it

also

reduces energy usage and

carbon

footprint

.

Firstly

, by investing in public

services

like public transport, the cost of living can be greatly reduced.

For example

, a person who owns a car has to pay fuel costs and maintenance costs in order to keep the car running.

Instead

, if public transport is available to him, it will cost less than owning a car.

This

is one of many benefits that impact the public.

Furthermore

, by using public transport, the energy usage and

carbon

footprint

can be highly decreased. When the majority of citizens use

this

means of transportation as their primary choice,

the

Correct article usage

apply

show examples

fuel consumption and

carbon

footprint

also

decrease.

This

is because the concept known as the economy of scale which basically means that it is cheaper to operate when everyone uses it. To summarise, public

services

investment

is superior to art

investment

.

This

is simply because it impacts everybody significantly. They save more money by using public

services

and

also

help the world by decreasing the demand for fuel and reducing the

carbon

footprint

.

This

is just one of many advantages to the public, there are many aspects that can

also

be beneficial to the public,

for example

, public libraries and public parks which

also

have all advantages mentioned previously.