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.

We all can agree that financial aid from governments plays a crucial role in any profession

such

as Art. Nowadays, artists are provided with great financial benefits by federal or even local authorities for positive development.

However

, a portion of some people believe that

this

type of

support

is unnecessary and can be spent on rather important tasks in society. Here, we will discuss both sides. On the one hand, financial

support

to any artist will bring them closer to achieving their dream by getting the required supplies and an appropriate environment.

Furthermore

,

such

opportunities for artists can be seen as opportunities for government bodies as

this

act will bring consumers from all over the world.

For instance

, the Taj Mahal was built by many artists and was funded by a Moughal Emporer, now producing a part of the income for the government in the tourism industry.

Additionally

, art can expose small community culture on a large scale if provided with enormous

support

.

As a result

, the country will be well recognised by the world.

On the other hand

, people who argue that financial aid should be spent on solutions to the current crisis or problem are not wrong. Governments have global crises on their hands right now ranging from global warming to recession. These aids can solve problems

such

as food deprivation in some parts of the country,

for example

, in Africa where part of the local tribes have suffered from lack of food and water. Investing money for the needed infrastructure can lead to better community

support

. In conclusion, spending a lot of money on enormous issues for the betterment of society will be a better choice in my opinion.

Also

, governments can provide some funds to the artist based on their performance but it should be best if kept minimum not a lot.