The public spending has always been a thought-provoking issue in all the societies. It is argued that the governments ought to allocate resources to community facilities rather than squander money on entertainment. Even though, I believe that art may be crucial for certain demographics of population, the prime concern of the authorities is rendering the decent living standards to the nation.
On the one hand, a comprehensive individual’s development is impossible without cultural interference. This means that professional career along with day-to-day chores are unable to provide entire fulfilment to a person. Throughout the history from the ancient Greek amphitheatres to the modern digital multimedia, humanity has craved for amusement that cultivates self-identification as a species. For example, during the Renaissance period many prominent inventors and discoverers scooped inspiration from art, which enables them to perform their works that left significant footprint in history. In other words, many modern social boons would have been otherwise impossible without existence of art.
On the other hand, some countries opt to contribute to art sacrificing vital funds that can be rendered to education, medicine and other important social institutes. In other words, entertainment industries may be exorbitantly expensive for the state budget, while the production of artworks is surely subjective. Proceeding from this, in terms of purely financial perspective, such governmental initiatives are highly unlikely to pay off. On the contrary, the returns from social benefits deriving from strong public services are explicit and encompass entire nation’s wellbeing. Thus, there is no doubt that community facilities reinforcement to be on the top of political agenda.
In conclusion, although no universal opinion exists to the question of whether country leaders should allot taxpayers’ money to public institutes or entertainment, I am of the opinion that a society is clearly better off from the well-funded public services.
The
public
spending has always been a
thought
-provoking issue in all the societies. It
is argued
that the
governments
ought to allocate resources to community facilities
rather
than squander money on entertainment.
Even though
, I believe that art may be crucial for certain demographics of population, the prime concern of the authorities is rendering the decent living standards to the nation.
On the one hand, a comprehensive individual’s development is impossible without cultural interference. This means that professional career along with day-to-day chores are unable to provide entire
fulfilment
to a person. Throughout the history from the ancient Greek
amphitheatres
to the modern digital multimedia, humanity has craved for amusement that cultivates self-identification as a species.
For example
, during the Renaissance period
many
prominent inventors and discoverers scooped inspiration from art, which enables them to perform their works that
left
significant footprint in history. In
other
words,
many
modern social boons would have been
otherwise
impossible without existence of art.
On the
other
hand,
some
countries opt to contribute to art sacrificing vital funds that can
be rendered
to education, medicine and
other
important
social institutes. In
other
words, entertainment industries may be
exorbitantly
expensive for the state budget, while the production of artworks is
surely
subjective. Proceeding from this, in terms of
purely
financial perspective, such governmental initiatives are
highly
unlikely to pay off.
On the contrary
, the returns from social benefits deriving from strong
public
services are explicit and encompass entire nation’s
wellbeing
.
Thus
, there is no doubt that community
facilities
reinforcement to be on the top of political agenda.
In conclusion
, although no universal opinion exists to
the question of whether
country leaders should allot taxpayers’ money to
public
institutes or entertainment, I am of the opinion that a society is
clearly
better off from the well-funded
public
services.