GRE寫作成為橫在中國學(xué)生的理想和現(xiàn)實之間的一大障礙，因此，如何攻克寫作這道屏障，成為擺在我們面前的首要任務(wù)。
It might also be tempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that arts patronage is
neither an appropriate nor a necessary funcuon of government. This argument has
considerable merit, in three respects. First, it seems ill-conceived to relegate decision and
choices about arts funding to a handful of bureaucrats, who are likely to decide based on their
own quirky notions about art, and whose decisions might be susceptible to influence-peddling.
Second, private charity and philanthropy appear to be alive and well today. For example, year
after year the Public Broadcasting System is able to survive, and even thrive, on donations
from private foundations and individuals. Third, government funding requires tax dollars from
our pockets--leaving us with less disposable dollars with which to support the arts directly and
more efficiently than any bureaucracy ever could.
On the other hand are two compelling arguments that public support for the arts is desirable,
whether or not unemployment and hunger have been eliminated. One such argument is that
by allocating public resources to the arts we actually help to solve these social problems.
Consider Canada's film industry, which is heavily subsidized by the Canadian government, and
which provides countless jobs for film-industry workers as a result. The Canadian government
also provides various incentives for American productoion companies to f~n and produce their
movies in Canada. These incentives have sparked a boon for the Canadian economy, thereby
sumulating job growth and wealth that can be applied toward education, job training, and
social programs. The Canadian example is proof that public arts support can help solve the
kinds of social problems with which the speaker is concerned.
A second argument against the speaker's position has to do with the function and ultimate
objectives of art. Art serves to lift the human spirit and to put us more in touch with our feelings,
foibles, and fate in short, with our own humanity. With a heightened sensitivity to the human
condition, we become more others-oriented, less self-centered, more giving of ourselves. In
other words, we become a more charitable society--more willing to give to those less fortunate
than ourselves in the ways with which the speaker is concerned. The speaker might argue, of
course, that we do a disservice to others when we lend a helping hand by enabling them to
depend on us to survive. However, at the heart of this specious argument lies a certain 感謝您閱讀《GRE作文范文大全（73） 》一文，出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。
It might also be tempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that arts patronage is
neither an appropriate nor a necessary funcuon of government. This argument has
considerable merit, in three respects. First, it seems ill-conceived to relegate decision and
choices about arts funding to a handful of bureaucrats, who are likely to decide based on their
own quirky notions about art, and whose decisions might be susceptible to influence-peddling.
Second, private charity and philanthropy appear to be alive and well today. For example, year
after year the Public Broadcasting System is able to survive, and even thrive, on donations
from private foundations and individuals. Third, government funding requires tax dollars from
our pockets--leaving us with less disposable dollars with which to support the arts directly and
more efficiently than any bureaucracy ever could.
On the other hand are two compelling arguments that public support for the arts is desirable,
whether or not unemployment and hunger have been eliminated. One such argument is that
by allocating public resources to the arts we actually help to solve these social problems.
Consider Canada's film industry, which is heavily subsidized by the Canadian government, and
which provides countless jobs for film-industry workers as a result. The Canadian government
also provides various incentives for American productoion companies to f~n and produce their
movies in Canada. These incentives have sparked a boon for the Canadian economy, thereby
sumulating job growth and wealth that can be applied toward education, job training, and
social programs. The Canadian example is proof that public arts support can help solve the
kinds of social problems with which the speaker is concerned.
A second argument against the speaker's position has to do with the function and ultimate
objectives of art. Art serves to lift the human spirit and to put us more in touch with our feelings,
foibles, and fate in short, with our own humanity. With a heightened sensitivity to the human
condition, we become more others-oriented, less self-centered, more giving of ourselves. In
other words, we become a more charitable society--more willing to give to those less fortunate
than ourselves in the ways with which the speaker is concerned. The speaker might argue, of
course, that we do a disservice to others when we lend a helping hand by enabling them to
depend on us to survive. However, at the heart of this specious argument lies a certain 感謝您閱讀《GRE作文范文大全（73） 》一文，出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。