Should the government invest money for the arts into public services instead?

Currently, most governments spend a large part of their budget not only on public services but the arts as well. It is essentially necessary to channel a proportion of public revenue for the entertainment sector since most should be spent on public services. It is important that the rulers spend a significant amount of their budgets on public services because these are our hospitals, roads and schools, and they determine the quality of life. Taking the UK as an example, the ministry has recently reduced public spending on health and education, pave the way for an increased waiting list for hospital treatments and fewer teachers, both of which will have vigorous effects in the future. Having demonstrated the importance of ensuring that a large proportion of authority money is spent on public services as it is the only way to maintain standards and accessibility to everyone. On the other hand, this situation does not mean that the arts should be completely eradicated. Firstly, it is difficult for many arts institutions to generate much profit because people are not prepared to pay high entrance fees for places such as art galleries or theatres, so without some help from the government, these places may face a bankrupt. Secondly, the arts have a noteworthy effect on social identity, with many people getting great pleasure in going to see music and theatre performances. Besides, the performing arts and literary arts containing dance and literature help out to keep our culture and history alive for future generations. To conclude, even though the majority of public spending should be directed towards public services, spending money on the arts is not a waste and should continue. A balance is required to ensure public services are maintained whilst the arts remain available to all.