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?

?

It has been claimed that the money of government ought to be invested in public services instead if the arts. Although public utilities indeed deserve government investment, I still tend to disagree with the statement because government should attach equal significance to arts as well.

?

There is no doubt that high-quality public services are conducive to improving people's quality of life, so government expenditure on that aspect are necessary. Public utilities are related to people's daily necessities, such as electricity supply and the construction about transportation facilities. The supply of electricity allows people to use various electronic devices for work or entertainment, while the popularity of public transport like bus and subway enables people to reduce the time and energy spent in commuting.

?

However, it is ridiculous to claim that it is wasteful for governments to spend money on arts because art can meet people's spiritual needs to some extent. Art has the function of aesthetics and entertainment, which can make people obtain spiritual enjoyment and aesthetic pleasure. If people feel stressful when they encounter great difficulties in work, visiting calligraphy and painting works in an art exhibition hall provides people with precious opportunities to relax and even get inspiration to solve problems.

?

In conclusion, my view is that both arts and public utilities exert crucial importance on the society; thus, government should not only invest money on public utilities, but also spend money on arts at the same time.