Should governments spend money on art，when they have so many other important issues and concerns？You should write at least 250 words. You should use your own ideas of knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.

Many people's lives are richer because of art—music， paintings， calligraphy， pictures， sculpture， poems and dance. However， some people feel that governments should be spending money on housing， medical care， or defence， instead of on art. This essay will discuss whether governments should or not spend money on the arts.

There are several reasons why governments should not finance artists. First of all， artists should have to follow the same rules as the rest of the market. If there is a demand for their music or sculpture， then they will be rich. Secondly， politicians generally do not have good taste. They will waste public money on popular art or on their own preferences. But the main reason why governments should minimize spending on the art world is that there are more important areas like housing， roads， hospitals， and factories which need the money first.

However， it would be wrong to say that governments should not spend any money at all on art. Everybody needs some beauty in their life， but not everyone can afford a Picasso or a piece of music. Governments should provide money for museums or concerts halls for everyone. Another point is that art allows people to express themselves and this is good for society， culture and thought. Thirdly， artists can be good for the economy by producing music， film， and attracting tourists.

All in all， governments should prioritize their spending carefully， but they should also allocate some of their budget for art. It is part of their duty to society and to future generations.