issue 80-model essay

tesolchina_RAUID：3675555

issue 80/88

issue 80 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 reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

10:56
The argument that funding for arts is not justifiable given the problems of hunger and unemployment is not reasonable when we consider the contribution of the funding to job creation, the little difference the funding could make to solving the problems and the long-term social benefits of arts.  

To begin with, the government funding for the arts can help create jobs that may alleviate the problems of unemployment and hunger. For example, when the government finances the construction of an art museum, it will create numerous jobs in buildings industry and help stimulate the local economy. With a stronger economy, the government can then receive more tax money to provide benefits for the society, including those suffering from poverty and hunger. Once the museum is built, it will further create more jobs, including those that require low-level skills, e.g. security guards.  The low-income people will then benefit from the project and these people are more likely to help those who suffer from poverty as they often come from the same socioeconomic class.  

In addition, this recommendation is not helpful when the problems of unemployment and hunger are so severe and widespread that the amount of funding for arts is insignificant, if not trivial, relative to the efforts required to address the problems. I do not have any quantitative data to present a more precise analysis. But intuitively it is safe to believe that we need far more resources to help those suffering from hunger and unemployment for which the funding for arts would not make much difference. In addition, we need to recognise that the problems of unemployment and hunger are not simple matters that can be solved with money alone. There are a host of institutional and economic problems causing unemployment and hunger that suspending funding for arts can barely help address.  

Finally, we should not overlook the long-term, unobtrusive benefits of arts for solving social problems such as unemployment and hunger. For one thing, people who are unemployed may find it helpful to spend some time in an art museum and find some emotional comfort in the art works. Government funding for such art projects would benefit unemployed people who may find hope and strength to move on in their lives. Meanwhile, art projects may address fundamental issues in human nature such as greed and anxiety that are the ultimate causes of unemployment and poverty. While funding for such projects may not help the unemployed or hungry people immediately, the art works may direct more public attention to the related issues and contribute to the development of long-term solutions.  

In conclusion, it is naive to assume that suspending the funding for arts can solve the problems of unemployment and poverty. In fact, government-funded arts have important short-term and long-term benefits for addressing both problems.  




issue范文与提纲目录(tesolchina)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mo ... amp;fromuid=3675555