Most artists earn low salaries and should therefore receive funding from government. To what extent do you agree and disagree?

Art is an extremely crucial component of society as helps preserve cultural heritage of societies. People learn art by various ways, some start learning by painting or simply starting a career in theatre. However, the amount of salaries received by artists is widely debated, and questions like whether the artists should be financially supported or not is also put forward. I agree with the statement as most artists struggle to earn living because of lower pay scales and fewer job prospects in the market. To begin with, people from an art background are paid far less than commerce or science background. According to an article published in New York Times, artists are paid 40% of what engineers or business graduates earn. Consequently, more and more people are leaning towards science and commerce. It is therefore a responsibility of state to intervene and ensure that artists receive enough funds so that they can pursue their passion. Likewise, artists struggle to land a job, let alone earning less than their counterparts. Job markets are highly skewed these days, as they require skilled workers who can contribute to their growth both in short-run and long-run. Because of low possibility of finding a job to support their families, this often leads to disappointment and massive unemployment. In that case, art is an under serious threat, provided that the government can allocate some funds for jobless artists. To conclude, in order to encourage upcoming artists to keeping pursuing their passion for art, states intervention as become an absolute necessity due to the lower salaries as well as few job opportunities. States should ensure that artists receive grants regularly so that the rich cultural heritage can be preserved through the sheer excellence of art.