Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money. Governments must invest this money in public services instead. To what extent do you agree with this statement? hay nhất giúp bạn có thêm tài liệu tham khảo để viết bài luận bằng Tiếng Anh hay hơn.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money

Đề bài: Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money. Governments must invest this money in public services instead. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 1

These days, the government spends a large part of its budget not only on public services, but also the arts. Although I agree that it is important to spend money on public services, I do not think spending additionally on the arts is a waste of money.

There are several reasons for spending a significant amount of the government budget on public services. First and foremost, public services are the things such as hospitals, roads and schools, and these things determine the quality of life that most of us will have. For example, if the government does not spend enough money on hospitals, the health of our society may decline. Similarly, if not enough money is spent on schools, our children may not be properly educated. Also, it will be the poor in our society that will be affected more if we do not spend enough on these things because they are the ones more dependent on such services.

However, this does not mean that the arts should be completely neglected. To begin, it is difficult for many arts institutions to generate much profit, so without some help from the government, many theatres and other such places may have to close. Moreover, the arts also have an important impact on our quality of life. Many people get great pleasure in going to see music and theatre performances so it is important that the government assists such institutions so that they can continue to provide entertainment to the public.

To sum up, there are clear benefits of ensuring a large amount of investment goes into public services as this influences the quality of life for nearly all of us. That said, I do not believe spending money on the arts is a waste of money as this too provides important benefits.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 2

Government funding with regards to art, such as music and theater, have been a longstanding issue of debate - many people believe that their tax money should alternatively be spent on public services. Personally, I believe that both art and public services bring about different benefits to society, and so government investment in both is desirable.  

On the one hand, it is important to note that art is the voice of a society, and therefore, to fund art is to encourage the expression of society as well as the development and pursuit of new ideas. Art has always served as a window into the past and reconnects today’s generation with previous ones and has helped to create new creative movements. Such is why many European governments continue to fund museums and exhibits in their own countries despite many of them being unable to operate on a commercial basis, for they can showcase their own heritage and culture and inspire future generations. 

On the other hand, spending on public services helps to ensure a more immediate benefit to the population. As opposed to art, it could be said that public services are enjoyed by most if not all of a country’s population, and therefore investing in it could be seen as much more equitable.  Important public services such as healthcare also have the benefit of keeping the population healthy while creating numerous high-quality jobs. The economic effects of public services could thus be observed to be more immediate and tangible than investments in art.  

Nonetheless, I argue that there are different benefits to both art and public services, and the government should invest in both.  

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 3

It is logical to maintain and increase government expenditure on public services because they are inherently related to a country’s development. However, I believe that governments reallocating their budget from arts to public services instead might not be a pragmatic approach, considering the potential values of the arts sector.

On the one hand, the chief reason behind diverting government subsidies from the arts to the public services might arguably be that the arts are considered mere entertainment, while the public services directly impact the country’s sustainable growth. This could be seen in Vietnam, where many schools and hospitals in rural areas require enormous financial support to renovate and purchase facilities, along with establishing the transport systems connecting these places to residential areas. Therefore, theoretically, curtailing the spending on arts to focus on public services is quite sensible.

Nevertheless, I would argue that the reallocation proposal probably overlooks the positive externalities that spending on arts can produce indirectly and in the long term, and creative industries deliver economic and social impacts even with little instant profitability. Firstly, museums, theatres, and cultural events can boost an area’s income through consumer purchases and attracting foreign investments. At the same time, tourism also contributes to the economy by promoting the hospitality industry and creating employment opportunities. Secondly, beyond the financial merits, arts can better the regional quality of life in several ways. For example, participating in cultural and artistic activities can improve the well-being of the residents. Aside from cultural consumption, local inhabitants also benefit from these fields, which leverages the power of arts in urban planning. Therefore, utilizing adequate government resources for arts is a rational strategy considering all the benefits hereinabove. Finally, strategic investments in arts can contribute substantially to the coffers for public services. South Korea’s policies of prioritizing the music sector are a successful example. The music industry in South Korea boosts the country’s economy by billions of dollars, a large portion of which is added to the fund for the public sector.

In conclusion, while ensuring sufficient investments in public services is necessary, I would contend that withdrawing capital from the cultural and creative sectors is an injudicious action considering the economic and social value arts can add to a country.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 4

How to allocate fairly government’s budget for a variety of social demands from health care, infrastructure to other mental ones such as arts remains controversial. Some people insist on that that money should be earmarked more for public services and less for the arts, while others believe each area should receive an inequitable amount of spending for its unique value contributed to social development. I partly agree with the latter view for the following reasons.

Admittedly, public services are not of immediate benefit for the entire society. The issues of health care, education, and infrastructure are always top concerns of any government that wants to recruit high-skilled labour, a strong workforce, and modern facilities. Some countries still struggling with abject misery after wars, a large amount of spending for music and painting proves infeasible.

However, the need for arts is rising these days for their long-term worth, especially during the time the country is beyond the peak of economic development and gears itself towards sustainable growth. With music, painting and other kinds of arts gaining their popularity, people’s spiritual life is continuously enriched. Such cities say, Florence, Paris, and Madrid are always unforgettable destinations of millions of visitors for their spectacular artistic creations and lure them into a different world where people are away from worries and let their creativity take off. These cities are also homes to various well-known art geniuses from Picasso, Leona DeVinci to Gaudi, who led art revolutions, partly by dint of their governments’ greater appreciation of this field and bigger expenditure on it. America and Britain are, too, other examples of nations where the music industry overwhelms other key ones for their greatest generation of profit. This is again derived from their governments’ frequent organization of musical shows and festivals to attract audiences worldwide.

Sure, investing in public services is going to improve the infrastructure; however, investments in the arts and traditions will simply helps us improve the economy and GDP.

In a word, governments should pay more attention to key sectors when their nations are in the embryonic stage of growth, but once they escape the life of poverty, arts should have a bigger say for their mental, educational and economic merits.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 5

It is precisely understandable that governments must begin looking at varying ways to improve the public facilities for a sustainable development. Governments must make a true innovation in keeping the society stable, meaning that the citizens should get adequate services from the governments. As per the said statement, governments should use the money for public development and not for other things, such as theatre and music. On a personal note, I complete disagree with this statement. In the forthcoming paragraphs, I shall support my reasons.

These days, to deal with development as a country, governments must compete with other nations. Arts can contribute to the quality of life positively. I believe that every nation has its own abilities and skills that make it stand out from the rest of the world. For instance, we are witnessing some of the competitions held at a global level, where people take part from every corner of the globe, such as Miss Universe, Asian Idol, World Choir Competition, and more. Every nation sends the best participants to take part in these competitions. Competitors get to compete with an array of people, coming from varying backgrounds, nations and cultures.

Additionally, I think that in case a government invests money into the art sector, the country, as a whole, will get to relish a gamut of benefits. For instance, India has a lot of skillful, talented artisans, crafting enchanting and mesmerising decor pieces. India can sell these crafts on a global scale. This way, our talent and skills can become everlasting, creating unending opportunities for the artisans as well as the country. However, to make the most out of this global sale, people would have to establish a good teamwork with the government only then adequate outcome can be achieved.

Sure, investing in public services can improve our infrastructure-game; however, paying major attention to only this factor will not reap any benefits. Hence, arts and theater should get the deserving attention as well.

Concluding this essay, I would like to say that governments should begin investing the funds to enhance art creation as it has bigger opportunities to make a country extremely successful.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 6

There are various areas of government expenditure that suffer from a lack of substantial monetary investment. In situations like these, sensible resource management must be followed by the administration to allocate necessary funds to the sectors in need. It is widely believed that public facilities and infrastructure should be given more priority instead of fine arts when it comes to the utilization of government resources. I am a strong supporter of this belief as urban services serve a more crucial purpose than artistic agencies.

A considerable proportion of the population is greatly dependent on government-provided services. These amenities are a crucial aid to the smooth functioning of an ordinary citizen’s life. Furthermore, the dependence on such facilities is more prevalent in third-world countries like India, Brazil, and China, where the general income of a majority of the populace makes private services unaffordable. Thus, bearing in mind the necessities of the people on a macro-level, the public-sector merits extensive financial backing.

Additionally, we must also address the fact that creative activities like drama and music are only possible when the basic needs are adequately fulfilled. If there is a deficiency in the physical and mental well-being of an individual, no matter how impressive the artwork is, it will fail to ignite any stimulus within that person. Thus, it is vital to enhance the standard of living of the population before refining the quality of arts, as artistic demands are always secondary to rudimentary needs.

Nevertheless, the value of creative work cannot be disregarded entirely as all the artforms collectively form an industry that is vital to the economy. However, this trade has the support of numerous wealthy individuals and organizations, thereby do not require much assistance from the government.

Finally, the framework of government services requires fiscal reform. Thus, the authorities should recognize these obligations and concentrate their resources on the public sector.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 7

It is often argued that the government should finance public services instead of spending its budget on arts, music and theatre. Although I agree that the government’s investments in public services play a very important role, I think that proper funding for the arts sector is also crucial for society.

On the one hand, the government should definitely allocate a large part of its budget to public services. This economic sector determines the overall quality of life, ensuring that some basic services, like schools, hospitals and roads, are available to all citizens irrespective of their income or social status. Public services satisfy the primary needs of the society and thus need proper funding, while artists and musicians are not curing diseases or building houses, so their role is secondary. For example, any country can live without music concerts, but the absence of medicine will create significant problems. That is why the government should adequately finance public services in the first place.

On the other hand, arts, music and theatre are not a waste of money, since they are an integral part of society’s cultural and intellectual development and amusement. Firstly, art and music draw people’s attention to diverse phenomena and represent the inward significance of things. Quite often a single drawing, piece or song can exhort myriads of people to reconsider their attitude towards some situations. This way, art serves as a major source of a nation’s personal and intellectual development. Moreover, visiting museums, watching movies and listening to music are common ways of relaxation and entertainment. Thus, the art sector is also important to society and should not be neglected.

To conclude, though I agree that the government should allocate a large part of its budget to such urgent needs of the society like public services, I think that arts, music and theatre should also be financed since they play an important role in people’s development and entertainment.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 8

In some countries, the higher tax incomes come from arts such as movie industry, music or theatre business. In this regard, arts are beneficial investments for the government. On the other hand, arts, such as music are the food for soul and government should patronise this sector.  

Moreover, in big countries like America and United Kingdom arts are one of the biggest earning sources for those countries. The fact that, many people want to come to these countries because their arts are famous and the best in the world. Due to the fact movie industries, music or theatre has been encouraged the government for tax. Indeed, it can help the government to invest some money to public services as well. Hence, those countries are famous for music and movies and its imposing in the world and have become destiny for many people around the world for gaining their passion in arts.

Undoubtedly, in the United States of America, we can see that musician, an actor or an actress have higher incomes, but they should be taxable for the government that is a policy not only in this country but also in some countries that have good arts too. For this reason, to develop some areas, for instance, healthcare, public transportation, etc. The government should encourage the artists and arts. Clearly, to give excellent service for American civil society, arts should not be ignored. Furthermore, taxpayers’ awareness among arts industries are higher and which is rapidly changing the economic growth of America.

Arts are the important media to give profits for the USA whereas in the UK too. Arts represent the identity, uniqueness, heritage and reflection of a nation.  In brief, investing in arts is by means a waste of money, rather it is a good investment both for economic growth and cultural enrichment.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 9

The government spending on arts has long been a contentious issue. Many counter the idea of government incurring expenses to promote arts. However, I feel governments should continue to spend money on arts. This will be argued by analysing how arts can contribute to a country’s economy as well as serve as a platform to achieve one’s goals.

To begin, arts such as music and theatre are steady sources of income for a country. A case in point would be New Zealand, where the government supports new artists by lending them money to kick-start their careers, which in turn enables the state to collect taxes on the revenue earned by these artists. This stream of income would be lost if there’s no spending to foster local artists. Hence it is clear that arts are vital for a country’s economic health rather than being a liability to it.

In addition, having a decent infrastructure for creative industries would mean realisation of dreams of millions who wish to be artists. For instance, in the UK, a person could choose to adopt arts as a career path, enabling him or her to earn a fair livelihood, rather than having to reluctantly pick a profession that he or she does not feel passionate about. A state where the government doesn’t invest in arts would most likely prevent people to go after what they long for, resulting in frustration on the part of people. Therefore, arts play an important part in contentedness of the individuals of a nation.

In summary, the government should continue to devote resources to arts since its significance in a country’s tax system and bringing happiness to people should not be underestimated. Henceforth, government’s funding of arts is not a waste of a country’s resources.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 10

Some people are convinced that the financial reserve of the government should be allocated to the public sector rather than on arts. However, I strongly believe that arts play a major role in the development of a country.

Primarily, arts symbolise the culture of a nation. In the primitive era, people celebrated their occasion through music and dance. These cultural activities have become a religious ritual for them, thereby representing an aboriginal tradition. It is in the style of an art such as designs of garments and historic rock sculptures that determine the ethnicity of a group. For example, in the Philippines, the Ifugao tribe in Bulacan is well known for wearing a bahag attire, which looks like an old an old-fangled brief. Their cultural identity becomes famous because of their artistic rice terraces.

Furthermore, arts have become the freedom of expression. Some arts enthusiasts can demonstrate their feelings through music or paintings. Such activities have a reasonable means of portraying emotions. One example of this is expressing depression through a composition of a melancholic song rather than to venture in a destructive behaviour such as inebriation of alcohol. Thus, art is a good passion that entices the people to do recreational activities.

Finally, it is widely believed that some artistic outputs have contributed to the tourism of a country. There are holidaymakers who visit a country so they can witness a painting, sculptures or any artistic masterpiece. To illustrate, the painting of Juan Luna “the Spolarium” in the Philippines has lured a considerable number of foreign visitors. This is because the painting depicts the suffering of most Filipinos at the time of Spaniard regime, which becomes a historical event in the country.

To conclude, I am convinced that arts have a greater contribution to the society. Not only does it represent the cultural heritage of a country, but it also encourages performing a formidable masterpiece that can promote the culture of a country.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 11

The art, music and theatre constitute an integral part of the culture of any country. The government often found supporting these by arranging a requisite amount of funds but for some spending on these activities should ideally be utilised for the welfare of the country’s people as it otherwise does not serve any good purpose. I think there is nothing wrong in supporting arts of a country and government is the ideal body who should do this.

With globalisation, often the culture of developing countries transforms to adopt the traits of developed countries. For example, traditional street plays in India are things of past and people are more inclined toward watching movies, a culture from the western countries. This poses a threat to the existence of an intrinsic regional culture of a country which actually defines the spirit and uniqueness of the country. So it is the responsibility of the government to support traditional art, music and theatre which tends to carry the cultural heritage of a country.

Every year a lot is spent by the government to promote regional art, music and theatre and this is something which people suggest is a waste of money. Prima facie it is correct, but on the other hand, it helps promote these features of a country which help the government to attract more and more tourists from other country and it also acts as the livelihood of the people who are solely dependent on these skills. For instance, nation foreign exchange has risen 20%, since the last five years, thanks to the increasing promotion by the government.

To summarise, it may involve a huge cost for a nation to support art, music and theatre but it should be seen as an investment for supporting the unique heritage of the country.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 12

It is highly debated that pouring government funding into art is such a waste, and it should be distributed in other sectors instead. I definitely believe otherwise. This essay will first explain the significance of art and then discuss in detail the financial opportunities stemming from its preservation.

The expression of the human creative mind and imagination plays a tremendous role in painting a nation’s distinct identity that sets it apart from others. Art has greatly contributed to our cultural growth, which betters the understanding of our heritage and fills the gap between different generations. As a result, we are able to take pride in the essence of who we are as a community and fluently communicate it with the world.

Moreover, quality of life could be vastly enhanced through the performing arts such as music and theatre due to their entertainment value. They are incredible outlets for people to release stress by allowing them to escape the harsh realities of life. Consequently, our emotional and mental health would be fully nourished, which could be just as crucial as looking after our physical well-being.

Not only should countries invest in art for sentimental reasons but also for economical motivation based on its potential earnings. Museums that house ancient artefacts could host special exhibitions to attract a significant number of tourists, and subsequently generate a sizable income. Destinations like the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and the Louvre Museum in Paris welcome millions of visitors annually and rake in an enormous amount of revenue. An additional benefit could be the employment opportunities available to the local workforce, who would eventually contribute to the economy in the form of income tax.

Art is undeniably valuable because it carries such cultural and financial importance. Therefore, governments should continue to invest in protecting as well as furthering its development.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 13

In this day and age, increasing attention has been placed on the debate over whether the government should allocate funding to the arts or devote the entire budget to public services. From my perspective, both the arts and public services bring different benefits to society, and therefore, government investment in both is desirable.

On the one hand, it is important to note that art is the voice of society. Funding the arts encourages public expression and the development and pursuit of new ideas. Art has always served as a window to the past, linking today’s generation with previous ones, and helps to vividly create new narratives. For example, European governments continue to fund museums and exhibits in their countries, despite many being unable to operate on a commercial basis. These institutions can still afford to preserve their heritage and culture.

On the other hand, spending the budget on public services provides more immediate benefits to the population and directly impacts the country’s sustainable growth. This can be seen in Vietnam, where many schools and hospitals in rural areas require substantial financial support to renovate and purchase facilities, along with establishing transport systems connecting these places to residential areas. Therefore, reducing art funding to focus on public services is essential.

To conclude, while ensuring sufficient investment in public services is crucial, I contend that withdrawing capital from cultural and creative sectors is unwise, considering the economic and social value the arts can add to a nation.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 14

The government must allocate funds on public services instead of investing in music and theatre arts which are considered an unnecessary expense. I completely agree with this statement of utilising people's money in public services than in the arts.

The foremost reason for not considering any investments in arts is because area, such as music and arts, is a recreational activity rather than an essential service. It does not form a vital link in society and is enjoyed by the wealthier sections of the society who constitutes around 20% in our country whereas the remaining 80% of people are economically poor and are devoid of basic amenities such as food, health, and employment. Thus, investment by the government authorities should not be in the arts.

On the other hand, the important reason for not spending in public service is it improves the welfare of the people and society. Spending money in providing free education would provide opportunities for children from economically deprived backgrounds to prosper in their life. As more people are getting graduated, a majority of jobs would be taken up by the locals than from outsiders. This, in turn, would overall enhance the economic activities of the country. Hence, investing in a citizen's education would result in the growth of the individual and the community.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that a government's expenditure must not be in a leisure activity such as arts, but instead ought to be spent on public services such as education which is beneficial to both the common man and the society as a whole.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 15

The debate over allocating government funds to support the arts is contentious, with some arguing it's a waste that could be better spent elsewhere. I hold a different view. This essay will first explore the importance of art and then delve into detail about the financial opportunities that arise from its preservation.

The expression of human creativity and imagination plays a crucial role in defining a nation’s unique identity that sets it apart from others. Art has significantly contributed to our cultural advancement, deepening our understanding of our heritage and bridging generational gaps. Consequently, we are able to take pride in our collective essence as a community and effectively communicate it to the world.

Furthermore, the quality of life can be greatly enhanced through performing arts like music and theater due to their entertainment value. They serve as valuable avenues for individuals to relieve stress and escape the challenges of daily life. As a result, our emotional and mental well-being can be fully nurtured, which is as important as maintaining our physical health.

Countries should invest in art not only for its cultural significance but also for its economic potential. Museums that preserve ancient artifacts can organize special exhibitions to attract a large number of tourists, thus generating substantial revenue. Iconic destinations like the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and the Louvre Museum in Paris welcome millions of visitors annually and generate significant income. Additionally, these initiatives create employment opportunities for local communities, contributing to the economy through income tax.

Art holds undeniable value because of its cultural and economic significance. Therefore, governments should continue to invest in its protection and advancement.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 16

When it comes to arts, it is often said that governments should invest in arts such as music, theatre, painting and sculpture, whereas others argue that the investment in those areas is such a waste of money. In this essay, I will discuss and analyze both views and state my own opinion.

As for investment in arts, it comes with several advantages such as growing talented artists and offering entertainment to people. Without a doubt, people who are eager to become a popular artist and make money tend to suffer from financial burden as doing artwork causes high expenses such as costs of art materials or music instruments and the places for working. It is needless to say that the investing in amateurs encourages them to achieve their goal such as holding their own exhibitions. In addition, many people are likely to enjoy entertainment such as listening to the music and watching movies on theatres, in their free times. Therefore, supporting artists is a crucial element to provide people with a variety of entertainment.

On the other hand, government has a duty to deal with various public services such as libraries, institutions as well as education for old people. As a matter of fact, students do not tend to use libraries for reading books, these days, due to the influence of smartphones. Moreover, there are not enough programs regarding exercises, preparing for retired life, prevention of dimentia and so on for old people. As this reason, many people argue that government should invest money in public services rather than in arts.

In conclusion, investing fairly in both arts and public services is one of the major duties of government. However, in my opinion, government should more invest in arts instead of public sevices as the more art industry grows up, the more entertainment can be activated.

Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money - mẫu 17

According to many people, the investment in art liked music and theatre are nothing but causes of money. They believe that this money can be utilized to fulfill the increasing demand for public services like hospitals and schools. I agree with this statement to some extent. This essay will emphasize on the reasons why both are important to our society.

Our society is built up with various elements. According to few people, some of them may not be that crucial for our existence. They believe that a community needs hospitals with advanced types of equipment and schools with innovative technology for the development of a better society. For instance, a hospital with all the diagnostic equipment’s like computed tomographic scan enables cloches to detect diseases at early stages result in fewer mortalities. Thus, government authorities must invest more finances in these essential sectors to strengthen their basic infrastructure.

Despite the above facts, I still believe that field of arts is also important for a society if not equally. Artistic sculptures created over time help us to remember our cultured existence. The stories reenacted by theatrical performances enable us to relive the history or feels the emotion of an artist, as we get connected with them emotionally at a subconscious level. Furthermore, the music songs whether traditional folklore or modern pop songs provide us the relaxing environment and entertainment, within preservation of our cultural inheritance.

In conclusion, I can confidently state that government should invest more in public services. However, I do not believe that financial funding for the futuristic section is a total wastage.

Xem thêm các bài luận Tiếng Anh hay khác:

• While many people go to university for academic study, more people should be encouraged to do vocational training because there is a lack of qualified workers such as electricians and plumbers. Do you agree or disagree?

• Nowadays, students can easily access information online, so libraries are no longer necessary. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• Public celebrations (national days, festivals) are held in most countries. Some people say that these celebrations are a waste of money and we should spend money on more important things. Do you agree or disagree?

• Many people think there is a general increase of antisocial behavior and a lack of respect to others. What do you think are the causes of this and how to improve the situation?

• People should follow the customs and traditions when people start to live in a new country. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• Hơn 20.000 câu trắc nghiệm Toán,Văn, Anh lớp 9 có đáp án

---