You're going to have to make an argument for why the taxpayer needs to pay for every citizen to take art history beyond "it's valuable". Okay, but $20,000 is also valuable and there are opportunity costs.
No I'm not, you're the one who said, "unproductive stuff shouldn't get funded" - not me. I think we should fund all of it because well educated people should make better decisions in a democracy and I want the cross disciplinary effects that occur when people can freely study their passions.
I'd say, "why shouldn't so-called unproductive stuff get funded?"
You are the one who said all education should be free and you're also the one arguing for change. I already answered why this is a value judgment. Because money.
The taxpayer pays so that everyone, including that taxpayer, has the right to take an art history class. Everyone pays so that everyone can take whatever course they want, whenever they want.
A bit like public healthcare - everyone pays for it so that everyone can use it.
I'd say, "why shouldn't so-called unproductive stuff get funded?"