Public money should not be spent on public art.
This is due to the use of public funds in some countries that are still underdeveloped. or
is developing and does not have the financial means to support a large amount of money
to organize the event or the manpower to seriously study this area of work. And although
using public funds is a good way to support but never supporting the arts will cause
Conflicts also occur between people who agree and disagree. Including the use of space
for organizing events that require a large amount of space. There is a huge amount of
labor involved in the job that needs to be managed. Therefore, we do not agree with the
use of public funds to support things that in some countries are still accessible only to
certain groups of people.
It is a form of vandalism, as it can cause damage to public property and detract from the
attractiveness of a neighborhood.
a lot of them are young delinquents who choose to deface public property, such as
billboards, buildings, and the like. These people shouldn't represent graffiti as a whole,
though they do give a rather negative image to true artists in the public's eye.
Not all "street artists" have the talent or develop the skills to actually create good "art."
One "street artist" might decide to deface one "piece of art" in order to create his/her own
"masterpiece." Poor quality or excessive "street art" can also drive property values down,
resulting in a financial loss for the property owner.
Wasting both resources and expenses , can't see the benefit at all . Maybe it's just beauty.
But other reasons are not possible.
Public money can be better used to improve other things than traffic art. Because this
money can be used to build or improve public utilities, it's much more than better.
Sometimes, the region does not agree with the existence of transportation art. This is an
imagination, but some places are not suitable for transportation art. The people or
landlords in the area do not agree, which is like an invasion of the area.
Sometimes the area doesn't agree with having public art. It actually happened with
imagination. But some places are not suitable for having and the people in that area or
the owner of the area did not give their consent. It's like a violation of space.
In fact, there are still illegal graffiti-style artistic creations, and the word "illegal" is enough
should not be encouraged
Some buildings still want to maintain their original or long history, but this place has been
destroyed by public art.