There's an overlooked assumption, that art should be a commercial product sold in the marketplace. Maybe some things shouldn't or don't need to be sold in the marketplace. Maybe art should be more like free software (or just be free - let's not parochially limit ourselves to software analogies).

Certainly for 'purposes' or aspects of art - as enlightenment, enrichment, the pinnacle of culture and civilization - free distribution would be better, spreading its benefits more widely. Also, like free-as-in-speech software (sorry), each work of art is part of the creative process for the next one; it can be reused, modified, extracted, etc, so free art would be much better in that respect too.

I understand that artists want to eat and have roofs over their heads. I want a pony. Seriously, perhaps there are other ways to accomplish that. UBI?