Although Proficient creators like musicians and painters are the assets of our society, whether they should be given sufficient fiscal support by their own authorities has triggered spirited debates. Some assert that government is obliged to generate money for their skilfulness, whereas others contend that alternative ways are to be taken into account. In my perspective, the latter should be considered highly, for they provide clear-cut advantages.
The idea is that government must lend a helping hand to its artists does have a handful benefits. One reason why people propose this is that artists could easily collect reasonable income to bring forth remarkable creations. The perceived general idea is that this readily available fund would encourage the talents to bring out the best in them, which, in turn, enhances remarkable achievements not only to the artists but also to the government. Nevertheless, it is highly likely that, if they get necessary resources as easily as ABC, they would develop laziness and this drawback retard the overall cultural promotion and improvement of their nation.
However, the counter arguments of supporting talents financially seem more likely to be effective rationally than the former. This is partly because people who work hard to earn money for their creative works will definitely value their job and thereby they strive tirelessly to achieve their dreams. They will, for example, estimate the needed costs and use it adequately. It is also relevant that artists can do further alterations in their creations as they are not bound by any rules and regulations, and they can clearly do whatever they want for better accomplishments. Moreover, each and every authority is mandated to rather consider other big issues, which is chiefly important to protect its public.
To put it in a nutshell, while getting promoted economically by the government is supportive, I believe, other options such as private funds are to be chosen, in addition to the government budget, it would be argued, could be allocated for other necessary purposes.
Although Proficient creators like musicians and painters are the assets of our society, whether they should be
given
sufficient fiscal support by their
own
authorities has triggered spirited debates.
Some
assert that
government
is obliged
to generate money for their
skilfulness
, whereas others contend that alternative ways are to
be taken
into account. In my perspective, the latter should
be considered
highly
, for they provide
clear
-
cut
advantages.
The
idea
is that
government
must
lend a helping hand to its
artists
does have a handful benefits. One reason why
people
propose this is that
artists
could
easily
collect reasonable income to bring forth remarkable creations. The perceived general
idea
is that this
readily
available fund would encourage the talents to bring out the best in them, which, in turn, enhances remarkable achievements not
only
to the
artists
but
also
to the
government
.
Nevertheless
, it is
highly
likely that, if they
get
necessary resources as
easily
as ABC, they would develop laziness and this drawback retard the
overall
cultural promotion and improvement of their nation.
However
, the counter arguments of supporting talents
financially
seem more likely to be effective
rationally
than the former. This is partly
because
people
who work
hard
to earn money for their creative works will definitely value their job and thereby they strive
tirelessly
to achieve their dreams. They will,
for example
, estimate the needed costs and
use
it
adequately
. It is
also
relevant that
artists
can do
further
alterations in their creations as they are not bound by any
rules
and regulations, and they can
clearly
do whatever they want for better accomplishments.
Moreover
, each and every authority
is mandated
to
rather
consider
other
big
issues, which is
chiefly
important
to protect its public.
To put it in a nutshell, while getting promoted
economically
by the
government
is supportive, I believe,
other
options such as private funds are to
be chosen
,
in addition
to the
government
budget, it would
be argued
, could
be allocated
for
other
necessary purposes.