Some people think that government is wasting money on the arts and this money could be better spent elsewhere. To what extent do you agree with this view ?

Some people believe that spending money on arts by the government is totally a wastage of that, however, this money could be utilized at somewhere else. I strongly disagree with the view as art is also essential and to be saved by the government, on the contrary I am somehow agreed with this as well. Arts in any aspect needs to be survived by the legal authorities. The reason for that is the arts such as ancient traditional monuments are representing the aged culture of a specific country. For example, the Taj Mahal in India is a beautiful monument which represents the art and culture of India, however if government is not spending money to look after that than they will lost their precious ancient art. In addition, the present art in any form whether it's a monument, a building or painting needs funds from government to look after, On the other hand, Government authorities needs to spend money where it is extremely vital for the survival of arts. Furthermore, if a government is not take the right decision that whether they have to spend money on which arts than it would be a chance of wastage of money. For instance, if a monument is already in a good condition than why a government should need to raise funds for that, instead use that money in other development areas. The decision of when and where to spend money on arts will reduce the wastage of money. In conclusion, This essay has argued on both the aspect of spending money on arts and if it is not spent on the right place than it could cause wastage of money. In nutshell, Arts are vital to save by any authorities of a nation, however it is also crucial which art needs money to save.