**"Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed."**Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reaso

An Afghan poet brings to words what everybody in Afghanistan thinks but can't express. His written words got picked up by the international press, bringing the troubles in Afghanistan back to the everyday news. This news isn't accepted on a positive note everywhere. Should nations therefore suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed?

The arts have their reason for existence. They speak to the heart and soul of people. By touching the heart, one can attain more than by feeding the stomach. It is important for a nation to keep its head up high. Moral support can be provided towards a nations citizens by means of a powerful message in the form of some sort of artwork. By gaining the trust of its inhabitants first, the nation can then start to provide the necessary provision for its people to lead a more comfortable life.

On an international level, the works of art might engender other nations to gather and develop a plan which might help the nation. Foreign countries could offer food help or might open up a part of their job market. In this way, new bonds could be made between nations. By expressing oneself by means of art is also a nonviolent and nonnegative way to raise awareness of a developing problem in your nation.

A unified agreement can be made that the arts can play their role during a period of hunger or unemployment. The great issue however is the financial side of the story. By spending money to the development of poems, paintings and plays, less can be put into the creation of new jobs or the gathering of food. It is a matter of setting priorities.

In spite of the obvious reason to tackle the problem first, it might be advantageous to not immediatly cancel the arts budget of a nation. By keeping the moral of the people up, one can attain more than by filling in a small percentage of the needs of the nation. By tackling a smaller problem first, more room can be made to tackle the bigger issue.