Some people think that governments should invest more in public services instead of wasting money on arts such as music and paintings. To what extent do you agree or disagree? v.4

Over the years, the governments' budget has become tighter, thus every expense must be carefully calculated. While some believe that governments' expenses should be focused on essential services, I would argue that a balance between public services and arts should be taken into account when planning the annual budget. Regarding public services, it is clear that a substantial amount of the annual spending plan should be reserved in order to improve their quality. Such aspects are responsible to raise population's well-being, which is crucial to develop the local community. For instance, when investment in public healthcare is prioritised, ordinary diseases, such as measles or chicken pox, can be completely exterminated, reducing, therefore, infant mortality. If authorities put these services on the back burner, many issues would lead to people's contentment reduction, hence generalised dissatisfaction. However, investing in the arts is not a waste of money, since the basics are already provided. In fact, the arts and other leisure activities play a pivotal role to raise citizen's satisfaction. This is because the arts can lead to low stress levels, as well as promoting a slump at routinely anxieties. Not counting with the fact that a society without artistic development is an automatic society, with no creativity and no potential to grow much further. To illustrate, Italian Renascentism was a period when not only had arts an essential importance, but also economic development was in excel. In conclusion, despite investing in basic services, such as healthcare, local councils should reserve an amount of the annual funds to finance artistic initiatives, since it is imperative to a thorough progress of the nation as a whole.