The question of whether the government should fund the arts concerns deeply the true nature of arts and ways to contribute to the prosperity of arts. Art is a corollary of aesthetic freedom, and it is a result of expressing one’s feelings and thoughts. Therefore, whether government’s financial funding encroaches upon this momentum of artistic development is the biggest clash in this debate. The most notable argument is located on whether the market is currently providing enough support to the art industry. In the status quo the artists are mostly funded by private funds, fees, and sales of pieces of art. This is highly dependent on the consumers’ taste and trend, and the proposition believes this is insufficient for these artists to extract maximum creativity and productivity. On the other hand, the opposition believes that the government funds will exacerbate the situation because of several reasons. Firstly, the artists should be able to follow the interest of the government. At the same time the government has to prioritize certain projects accordingly to the public’s interest which is very hard to put it in numerical ranks. Secondly, funding from the private sector becomes secondary for the artists which might deteriorate the general interest of the citizens.