Public funds should be spent and encouraged to influence good standard of living so as to avoid sickness as opposed making provisions for those who are ill. In my opinion, I consider that public expenditure allocated to foster healthy living to curb illness has more drawbacks when taken into account. It benefits such as a reduction in the cost of research and development and increased productivity cannot be overlooked.
One major benefit of investing public expenses to administer for a better lifestyle and reduce sickness is a reduction in the cost of research and development. In other words, when public funds are pulled to sensitize the economy on ways to stay healthy and live a better life, this will result to a low rate of sickness in the society and thus, there would not be a need to invest much on the causes and solutions of any type of disease. In addition, the productivity of the populace will be at a high peak. This is due to the fact that, the numbers of people with illness will be significantly lower, because of the practises of living a healthier life. For example, in Indonesia the most common class of food consumed by the citizens are vegetables and whole grain foods. This has led to the increase in the life span of the country compared to other nations.
On the other hand, government's expenditure focused only to keep people active and ignoring the sick will amount to a greater issue which I agree. In other words, lack of concentration and concern of the people who are not physically fit can lead to more complicated issues. For example, the Ebola outbreak witnessed by Nigerians in 2017 would have been an epidemic issue, if the full focus and attention of the government was not directed to the affected individuals. Furthermore, a growing amount of unfit people left unattended will affect the development and growth rate of a country. Additionally, lesser individuals will be available to carry on with their daily tasks and activity, which will indirectly affect the output rate and revenue of such nation.
To conclude, while spending public resources to increase healthy living to result in the reduction of ailments is beneficial, epidemic outbreak and low productivity output are major demerits of ignoring the sick.
Public
funds should
be spent
and encouraged to influence
good
standard of
living
so as to
avoid sickness as opposed making provisions for those who are ill. In my opinion, I consider that
public
expenditure allocated to foster healthy
living
to curb illness has more drawbacks when taken into account. It benefits such as a reduction in the cost of research and development and increased productivity cannot
be overlooked
.
One major benefit of investing
public
expenses to administer for a better lifestyle and
reduce
sickness is a reduction in the cost of research and development. In
other
words, when
public
funds
are pulled
to sensitize the economy on ways to stay healthy and
live
a better life, this will result to a low rate of sickness in the society and
thus
, there would not be a need to invest much on the causes and solutions of any type of disease.
In addition
, the productivity of the populace will be at a high peak.
This is due to the fact that
, the numbers of
people
with illness will be
significantly
lower,
because
of the
practises
of
living
a healthier life.
For example
, in Indonesia the most common
class
of food consumed by the citizens are vegetables and whole grain foods. This has led to the increase in the life span of the country compared to
other
nations.
On the
other
hand,
government
's expenditure focused
only
to
keep
people
active and ignoring the sick will amount to a greater issue which I
agree
. In
other
words, lack of concentration and concern of the
people
who are not
physically
fit can lead to more complicated issues.
For example
, the Ebola outbreak witnessed by Nigerians in 2017 would have been an epidemic issue, if the full focus and attention of the
government
was not directed to the
affected
individuals.
Furthermore
, a growing amount of unfit
people
left
unattended will affect the development and growth rate of a country.
Additionally
, lesser individuals will be available to carry on with their daily tasks and activity, which will
indirectly
affect the output rate and revenue of such nation.
To conclude
, while spending
public
resources to increase healthy
living
to result in the reduction of ailments is beneficial, epidemic outbreak and low productivity output are major demerits of ignoring the sick.