Some people argue that arts, such as paintings and music, are a waste of money and the government should spend this money on other public services. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? v.4

In the process of dividing annual government budget in a city, this question usually comes to mind that which section has the main importance? The cultural attractions or the infrastructure of a city. In the following paragraphs, the significance of both sections will be critically discussed before coming to a conclusion. Firstly, boosting cultural attractions leads to the improvement of tourism, both domestic and international, and the unity of society. Museums and art galleries, for instance, act as a real social network, and provide an atmosphere which in people with same interests can gather and interact. As a result of interactions among people, the prejudices and barriers that exist among them will be broken, and their mutual understanding of various cultures and lifestyles will be improved. By contrast, critics point that the infrastructure is of more importance for the development of a country, particularly for economic growth and alleviation of poverty. Public transportation, health care system, or energy generation are examples of areas that should be planned for development to promote the economy of a nation. Therefore, it is obvious that the financial priority should be given to the fundamental facilities of a city since they are the basic needs of further developments. In conclusion, although building cultural structures such as theaters and museums have always been considered as places that have this power for unifying population, but it will be a waste of time and money where the infrastructure of a city is still inadequate and incomplete. Hence, I personally believe that enough funds must be allocated to the extension of basic requirements of a city before the extension of cultural aspects.