Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative sources Discuss both views and give your own opinion

people give two controversial opinions about this topic. some people believe the government should spend money for supporting to creative artists. however, the remaining opinion has a thought that alternative source will fund them. but in my point of personal view, I am feeling that artist should be received supporting from both of government and alternative sources.

First of all, I strongly believe that giving financial support to talent artists it works in creating great strides about promoting advertisement the beauty of city. In addition, it also universalizes too much in education, some works of art, or literature,… to young people these days. Many historical works represent traditional culture, the knowledge of historical monument should be diffused in order to help people know more clearly about their history’s country or city. For example, in my country, there has a place to contain a lot of hero history information – who have a big merit in protecting country. some of salient events should be reminded to young people know more about the difficult that historical heroes have experienced and be grateful to them.

On the other hand, I totally understand arguments disagree about government give financial support to creative artist, I honestly think that the reason start from government has more important concerns. State budgets should spend in improving pollution environment, education, healthcare, security,… So, spending money in supporting to talent artist seems to be luxury.

In conclusion, I stand up for agreeing in artist should be received financial support from government and alternative sources. however the government do not need to spend, but sometimes, the government should spend a little to help some artists make big proffesional projects.