Improving living conditions within society is a far superior approach to crime prevention than the treat of punishment. To what extend do you agree or disagree with this statement and why? v.2

The twenty-first century has been a rapid rise in the number of crimes all over the globe. As a result, one of the main aims of the government is to find the best way of crime prevention. From my point of view, although punishing criminals might temporarily reduce crime, improving living conditions may prevent reason to make a crime at all. This essay will support this view with arguments in the following paragraphs. To begin with, the majority of criminals make crimes due to the lack of money. To put it another way, some people think that there is the only way to survive in our expensive world is to be a thief, burglar or fraud. In this case, a large number of crimes can prevent by improving population life conditions. For example, recently the problem of unemployment has become quite popular among young people. Eventually, some parts of unemployed youth despair and choose the easiest way to earn money through crime. That is why, if the government gives more opportunities to find a job, increases the average salary, and supports citizens, the crimes would be prevented. On the other hand, many support the view that making crime is a disease. In other words, some criminals are mentally ill people, who live only to make a crime. I believe that this type of person has to be put into prisons or hospitals. To show an example, paedophilia do not stop after improving living conditions, the only solution for this terrible crime is to punish criminals. Nevertheless, to prevent a large proportion of the crime the government needs to revise population living standards. In conclusion, despite some of the perceived benefits from the punishment of the criminals, I still believe that the best solution to reduce crime is to improve people’s living conditions.