- 移动课堂是100留学最新推出的“贴身学习伴侣”， 其中拥有名师直播、录播课程和名师答疑等多项服务。课堂可以为大家提供新的移动学习平台,让大家学习更方便，想学就学!
Most artists earn low salaries and should therefore receive funding from the government in order for them to continue with their work. To what extent you agree?
Some people believe that the majority of artists earn low salaries and hence government funding is necessary for them to continue with their profession. I strongly disagree with this statement because of the reasons mentioned below.
Most of the talented artists are earning good salary. In any field of art, hardworking and skilful artists have successful life with enough fame and money. More specifically, actors, painters, writers and dancers are getting good remuneration for their performance. Paintings of good painters are sold for a great deal of money. It is well known to the public that dancers and actors lead highly luxurious lives.
Government funding is not at all required for these artists. Most of the artists are leading good standard life compared to many other people in the society. In other words, there are many sections of people who are really poor and actually need some help from the government to meet their basic needs such as food, clothes and education. For example, there are many people who do not have a proper house to stay in. Road workers and construction workers are earning low wages. There are many families where there are sick males who are unable to do any job. So, the government should give its help and support to these poorer sections of the society.
Another argument against giving financial aid to artists is that most of them have some sort of university education. So if they are not able to earn as much as they want, they can do some other job to supplement their income.
In conclusion, artists are getting enough income and government support is not mandatory for them. Therefore I strongly disagree with the statement.