Unanswered [8] / Urgent [0]
 

Home / Writing Feedback /     

Governments money for artsists; 'Artists have been seen as talented people'


answers: 6
Some people think that the governments spent money on artists would be better than more important things. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Artists have been seen as talented people. So, with aiming to increase the number of artists, many people believe that government should have incentive to them while others, including me, argue that this policy is not fair at all for other occupations. As shall I debate, this essay is a whole picture depicting why government should not spend more money on artist is better.
To begin with, it is deniable that the number of artist people is a minority in our society, which does not cost much government's fee to prompt their career development. However, in fact, if this policy works, generally, it violates the fairness of human -being. People, they were born under the same world and impartial society, thus, by no means do governments carry out some initial things in favor of artiest people. It is the cognition which demeans any communities under its resident's eyes. Accordingly, many conflicts or protests related to this policy, absolutely, sooner or later will happen.
Further and even more important, the approval of this policy in any nations may harm artist's career. If thinking out of the box of its further consequence, spending more money on artist will devastate economy development gradually. Though, without passion of this field many people tend to invest their money in training course so as to reach their dream to become artists who is beneficial a lot from this mechanism. It is no doubts that some cases which suffering from the crowded effects, tend to jump into that field and abandon their main job then, which a culprit of the imbalance of employment rate. For instance, In US, after being prevalent for over a decade, many American families which do not have a sound financial background, still insisted taking a loan from banks to impose their children follow artist track, which indirectly delay economic improvement.
To draw a conclusion, I once again reaffirm my opinion that the erroneous government's decision on adopting this policy leads to foreseeable drawbacks. Alternatively, policy-makers should let people pursue their own dreaming career without being influenced from any social trends.

lilythuy2289:
Artists have been seen as talented people

Artists are talented people
lilythuy2289:
many people believe that government should have incentive to them while others, including me, argue that this policy is not fair at all for other occupations

many people believe that government should have incentive to them,
lilythuy2289:

While others, including me, argue that this policy is not fair at all for other occupation
As shall I debate,

As I shall debate
May 28, 2013, 11:29pm   #3
lilythuy2289:
Artists have been seen as talented people.
........ I think you can be more firm :D ............. They are indeed talented :D
Artists are gifted people with creative talents that help sooth others emotions and feelings.
lilythuy2289:
government should have incentives to for them while others

lilythuy2289:
As shall I debate

As I shall debate
lilythuy2289:
, this essay is a whole picture depicting why government should not spend more money on artist is better.
............... this needs improvement in its presentation.
lilythuy2289:
it is deniable that the number of artist people is a minority in our society
........ you mean to say there are many artists in our society or otherwise? .......... the phrase "it is deniable" does confuse what you try to convey............. Try and avoid crowding your sentences with too many phrases and words........ Present ideas in more simpler, yet interesting way.
lilythuy2289:
However, in fact, if this policy works, generally, it violates the fairness of human -being

so many phrases and words. make it simple.
However, if this policy works, it violates the rule of fairness in governments's part.
lilythuy2289:
spending more money on artist will devastate economy development gradually. Though, without passion of this field many people tend to

make ur thoughts parallel by using same tense.

lilythuy2289:
who is beneficial a lot from this mechanism

who is beneficial by this mechanism. Passive voice rule.
lilythuy2289:
no doubts

no doubt
lilythuy2289:
. It is no doubts that some cases which suffering from the crowded effects, tend to jump into that field and abandon their main job then, which a culprit of the imbalance of employment rate.

no subject mentioned. n sentence is a lot complicated.
[quote=lilythuy2289] which do not have a sound financial background, still insisted taking[/quo
parallel tense should be used.
May 30, 2013, 11:20pm   #7
Hi, lilythuy2289.

lilythuy2289:
spending more money on artist will devastate economy development gradually.

Investing too much resources on artists will have a negative impact on the development of the economy

lilythuy2289:
Accordingly, many conflicts or protests related to this policy, absolutely, sooner or later will happen.

My version is ' As a result, it is no need to say that many conflicts or protests against this actists-support policy may stage sooner or later'.



Home / Writing Feedback /

Thread closed ✓