Many people argue that health care should be given as the first priorities by government, whereas others said that spending the taxpayers' money is more important. However, I completely agree with the former.
For those who advocate the opinion of spending the money that belongs to the taxpayers should have their argument justified. On the one hand, a certain amount of tax revenue must be allocated to healthcare. Today, a lot of specific diseases are becoming increasingly popular, and supplying vaccines, medicines, or treatments would be prohibitively expensive. For example, because to automobile exhaust fumes and gas emissions from industrial factories, a considerable part of the population today suffers from respiratory ailments or lung cancer. The treatments for those patients and the treatment facilities are frequently costly, and hospitals may find themselves in financial difficulty without help from the tax system.
On the other hand, antagonists might argue that health care is given top priority by the government. Healthcare is not the only industry that need funding to stay afloat. For example, taking education. The competence of the future workforce is related to the quality of the educational system. As a result, a country can benefit in the long run from such skilled human resources if the tax money is used to build schools, fund training courses for lecturers, or pay native speakers to teach a foreign language. Furthermore, the government should invest in resolving transportation issues. So, congestion is a global issue these days, and the only way to deal with it is to build new motorways and widen limited public routes.
In contrast, I believe that the government should use tax dollars to improve not only healthcare but also education and transportation.
Many
people
argue that health care should be
given
as the
first
priorities by
government
, whereas others said that spending the taxpayers' money is more
important
.
However
, I completely
agree
with the former.
For those who advocate the opinion of spending the money that belongs to the taxpayers should have their argument justified. On the one hand, a certain amount of
tax
revenue
must
be allocated
to healthcare.
Today
,
a lot of
specific diseases are becoming
increasingly
popular, and supplying vaccines, medicines, or treatments would be
prohibitively
expensive.
For example
,
because
to automobile exhaust fumes and gas emissions from industrial factories, a considerable part of the population
today
suffers from respiratory ailments or lung cancer. The treatments for those patients and the treatment facilities are
frequently
costly, and hospitals may find themselves in financial difficulty without
help
from the
tax
system.
On the other hand
, antagonists might argue that health care is
given
top priority by the
government
. Healthcare is not the
only
industry that need funding to stay afloat.
For example
, taking education. The competence of the future workforce
is related
to the quality of the educational system.
As a result
, a country can benefit in the long run from such skilled human resources if the
tax
money is
used
to build schools, fund training courses for lecturers, or pay native speakers to teach a foreign language.
Furthermore
, the
government
should invest in resolving transportation issues.
So
, congestion is a global issue these days, and the
only
way to deal with it is to build new motorways and widen limited public routes.
In contrast
, I believe that the
government
should
use
tax
dollars to
improve
not
only
healthcare
but
also
education and transportation.