Governmental support for creative artists - an attempt to write a IELTS essay (1 of 2)

(the essay was too long for the notebook so I've divided it in two records)

Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians. Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Whether or not the governments should support the arts financially has been a much-debated issue in many countries. The Proponents of the governmental funding argue that art should develop freely, without regard to such matters as money or fashion. They argue that governmental financial support would give every artist the freedom to unleash their creative genius. Indeed, there are many examples of great artists who were all but ignored or ridiculed by their fellows: F. Scott Fitzgerald died believing himself a failure, while van Gogh struggled almost his whole life and became famous largely predominantly/mainly after his death. If only they had had a little more money, some kind of a state stipend, then maybe The Great Gatsby wouldn't have been be Fitzgerald's last work? 
Their opponents are not so generous, believing that the taxpayers' money should better be spent elsewhere, or that living off a meager stipend would deprive ambitious people from their chance to prove themselves, or that artists should pay more attention to the world in which they live in and to the tastes of its inhabitants, or... The list goes on and on. I admit that I'm not familiar with the whole range of reasons *not* to give financial support to artists but some of them look no less valid than their counterparts'. 
For example, for van Gogh to get financial support, someone would have had to should have taken an interest in him first. The alternative would be supporting everyone who call themselves artists, which would take an exorbitant amount of money. So, to get support, a struggling artist should first become known to someone important who wouldmight then decide that yes, this young man deserves a stipend. That's far goes a long way from the idea of helping those who needs this help the most. So let's leave supporting the arts to philanthropists and specialized culture funds, the opponents say.