Some people think that the government is wasting money on the arts and this money could be better spent elsewhere. To what extent do you agree or disagree? v.5

There is a fierce debate about government expenditure on art projects. Some firmly believe it is just a huge waste of money especially when there are so many practical problems. In my view, I support this statement to some extent, however, art is also an indispensable part of the society that should be valued. Surely, considering the finite and limited government funding, there are a variety of urgent issues such as environmental contamination, economic development, and social welfare that require investment. Compared to those issues, art investment is never the top priority that the government should be concerned with. In addition, if the government spent less money on arts, then they would be able to help solve those urgent problems and further conform to the interests of the majority. However, although arts project is not the first place should be dealing with, it does not mean that the expenditure on arts is unnecessary. As far as I concerned, the government is still responsible for devoting to such a project on account of cultivating the public’s perception of pursuing beauty. For example, the national gallery and opera house are the places where can expand people’s capacity of the mind to be more creative and innovative. Moreover, even if arts not directly connecting with the surrounding or survival conditions of people, it also plays an important role in their spiritual life. In conclusion, although there are several more urgent issues that need to be funded, the politicians should still take account of the arts in expenditure. The ground for saying this is that arts provide spiritual support for individuals so that funding arts is not squandering money.