Em mới chập chững học Ielts được 1 tuần, chủ yếu là tự tham khảo ạ.Em mong mọi người có thể nhận xét , góp ý và đánh giá band cho bài của em!.
The government revenue is raised essentially from tax. Therefore, citizens are concerned about how the government allocates its budget. Some people firmly contend that the government financial support for musicians, artists and poets is necessary while others refuse for sake of its waste. Both sides have valid rationales but I personally believe that the first view makes more sense and my arguments are presented below.
Obviously, musicians, artists and poets are those creating spiritual value for society which is much appreciated but their contribution isn't correspondingly paid. For example, in Vietnam, most musicians or artists can't support themselves from their interest
Another point worth is that music, art and poetry symbolize a country's culture so the government needs to show their role in maintaining characteristics in culture through subsidising potential musicians, artists and poets to develop their talent and passion.
Nevertheless, there is conflict between the limited government budget and the unlimited social demands,which put priority on other fields such as education,medical,economics..In most developing countries,the government budget isn't enough to support for these fields .In addition,people have lowered the value of music, art or poetry so they aren't willing to spend their money on its creators.For instance, most people watch music or art program on television instead of being visual in a concert or art exhibition with one-milion tickets .
All in all, while to a certain extent that musicians,artists and poets are deserved to get the government 's support to devote to their career,ultimately develop a country's culture.