Should governments spend money to help art and artists?

Governments have to decide where to spend the country's revenue. One area which could benefit from these funds is art, however, it is my opinion that this should only be done if other areas are fully covered. Art can have significant impact on the world. Artists create a window to the country's status through their own unique lenses. They have the ability to educate the masses and inspire them with their art pieces. The image of the Uncle John for example, used during the world war, enticed many Americans to join the fight and lay their lives for their country, possibly changing the outcome of the war. This is just one example of how art can impact the world, but it is enough to prove the crutial role art can play. For this reason, it is my opinion that governments should consider supporting creators and their work. However, I believe other sectors such as healthcare and education should take priority. The most important resource of a country is its citizens. Therefore the governments should prioratize spending on their health and well-being as people can not contribute to their societies if they are not in good shape. Furthermore, in the modern world, it is difficult to be productive members of society without proper education. I believe providing the population the opportunity to learn and develop practical skills which could solve current issues is more important than supporting art and artists. Hence, since the income of the governments is limited, in my view they should only fund art if they have covered these critical expences. In conclusion, I would argue that while the value of art is not in quesiton, governments should only subsidize it after they have ensured that the general population is cared for completely.