There are certain needs and expenses that we cannot do away with; therefore, I agree with the argument that a guaranteed minimum income is essential to protect the rights of all citizens in a democratic country.
In almost all nations the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The poor and the marginalized sections of the society also have basic needs. They need food, clothing and shelter. They want to send their children to school. Since many of these people lack a proper livelihood, it is essential for the government to disburse welfare payments.
Of course, the welfare schemes are bound to be abused and there is no guarantee that the aid will always reach the needy. Even so, in my opinion, such schemes are required for the all round development of a country. Take, for instance, the case of India. Although the country has made rapid economic advancements over the last few decades, it still has millions of people living below the poverty line. India has robust welfare schemes for the poor. For example, the country’s public distribution system provides food grains and other essentials at highly subsidized rates for the poor. In fact, in many Indian states, poor families can get adequate amounts of rice or wheat for free. On the flip side, the poor are not the only beneficiaries of these schemes. In fact, millions of people living above the poverty line also receive the benefits by manipulating the system with the help of corrupt officials and politicians. As a result of this, the nation ends up spending a lot more money than it should for welfare schemes. However, abolishing welfare programmes is not the answer to this problem. If India pulls the plug on its public distribution system, thousands of people will die of hunger. So, the government continues the system in spite of knowing its limitations and with the help of new and improved technologies, the country is steadily removing ineligible people from its social benefit programs.
To conclude, just because welfare programmes are liable to be abused, it does not mean that the government should abolish them. With political will and the use of new technologies, it is possible to ensure that governmental aid reaches the right hands.
There are certain needs and expenses that we cannot do away with;
therefore
, I
agree
with the argument that a guaranteed minimum income is essential to protect the rights of all citizens in a democratic country.
In almost all nations the rich are getting richer and the
poor
are getting poorer. The
poor
and the marginalized sections of the society
also
have basic needs. They need food, clothing and shelter. They want to
send
their children to school. Since
many
of these
people
lack a proper livelihood, it is essential for the
government
to disburse
welfare
payments.
Of course
, the
welfare
schemes
are bound
to
be abused
and there is no guarantee that the aid will always reach the needy. Even
so
, in my opinion, such
schemes
are required
for the all round development of a
country
. Take,
for instance
, the case of India. Although the
country
has made rapid economic advancements over the last few decades, it
still
has millions of
people
living below the poverty line. India has robust
welfare
schemes
for the
poor
.
For example
, the
country’s
public distribution
system
provides food grains and other essentials at
highly
subsidized rates for the
poor
. In fact, in
many
Indian states,
poor
families can
get
adequate amounts of rice or wheat for free. On the flip side, the
poor
are not the
only
beneficiaries of these
schemes
. In fact, millions of
people
living above the poverty line
also
receive the benefits by manipulating the
system
with the
help
of corrupt officials and politicians.
As a result
of this, the nation ends up spending a lot more money than it should for
welfare
schemes
.
However
, abolishing
welfare
programmes
is not the answer to this problem. If India pulls the plug on its public distribution
system
, thousands of
people
will
die
of hunger.
So
, the
government
continues the
system
in spite of
knowing its limitations and with the
help
of new and
improved
technologies, the
country
is
steadily
removing ineligible
people
from its social benefit programs.
To conclude
,
just
because
welfare
programmes
are liable to
be abused
, it does not mean that the
government
should abolish them. With political will and the
use
of new technologies, it is possible to ensure that governmental aid reaches the right hands.