There is no doubt that governments are responsible for preserving the safety of their people through taking various measures such as establishing defense facilities. It is believed by some that the budget allocated to defense programs should be expanded, while the one for social benefits should be lowered. While I understand their concerns and justifications, I opine that funding less on social services can lead to considerable security issues.
Each state should be able to ensure its citizens that their safety is guaranteed against external threats. In other words, a well-structured defense program, which requires particularly reasonable funding, should be implemented by the government to eliminate the country’s vulnerabilities to external adversaries. For example, providing the military forces with the latest facilities to boost their quality demands spending a considerable amount of money by the state. If they are not properly funded, the citizens will be witnessing intruders breaking into their lands.
The government’s funding on social benefits, however, should not be decreased, since providing these services is of equal importance with defending against aliens. To clarify, should unprivileged individuals cannot receive their required social services such as medical ones and social insurance to name but a few, they are more likely to commit crimes like rubbery. In terms of psychology, the less social welfare people feel, the more temptation of crime commitment they will have. Consequently, not only can less funding on social benefits result in a gloomy society, but also it can lead to an insecure society and other disastrous consequences.
In conclusion, although defending against external intruders requires a considerable amount of money to be spent by the government, it is not an ideal idea to spend less on social services to achieve it, because in my opinion, providing these facilities and the security of society are intertwined.
There is no doubt that
governments
are responsible for preserving the safety of their
people
through taking various measures such as establishing defense facilities. It
is believed
by
some
that the budget allocated to defense programs should
be expanded
, while the one for
social
benefits should
be lowered
. While I understand their concerns and justifications, I opine that
funding
less
on
social
services
can lead to considerable security issues.
Each state should be able to ensure its citizens that their safety
is guaranteed
against external threats.
In other words
, a well-structured defense program, which requires
particularly
reasonable
funding
, should
be implemented
by the
government
to eliminate the country’s vulnerabilities to external adversaries.
For example
, providing the military forces with the latest facilities to boost their quality demands spending a considerable amount of money by the state. If they are not
properly
funded, the citizens will be witnessing intruders breaking into their lands.
The
government’s
funding
on
social
benefits,
however
, should not
be decreased
, since providing these
services
is of equal importance with defending against aliens. To clarify, should unprivileged individuals cannot receive their required
social
services
such as medical ones and
social
insurance to name
but
a few, they are more likely to commit crimes like rubbery. In terms of psychology, the
less
social
welfare
people
feel, the more temptation of crime commitment they will have.
Consequently
, not
only
can
less
funding
on
social
benefits result in a gloomy society,
but
also
it can lead to an insecure society and other disastrous consequences.
In conclusion
, although defending against external intruders requires a considerable amount of money to
be spent
by the
government
, it is not an ideal
idea
to spend
less
on
social
services
to achieve it,
because
in my opinion, providing these facilities and the security of society
are intertwined
.