Many countries invest money to prepare competitors to join top competitions, like the Olympics or the World Cup, while others feel that this is a waste of tax-payer money. Discuss both sides and state your opinion.

In recent years, there has been a profound increase in the number of individuals questioning the amount of money spent on preparing athletes for international competitions. On the one hand, many people believe that this approach is a poor use of valuable tax-payer money and these funds could be diverted to combating poverty instead. However, critics, myself included, are of the strong belief that investing vast sums for athletes to compete at top-level international competitions is justified, due to the psychological effect that winning such honors brings to the nation. To begin, there is an argument to be made that the exorbitant amounts of money would be better spent on bringing people out of poverty. To illustrate this point, when India withdrew from the World Cup in 2006, the government was able to relocate 20, 000 people living in the slums into council housing, therefore drastically improving the lives of those people as a result. For this reason, it is clearly evident that when funds are used in ways to benefit less fortunate people, much more good can be done to not only the people it directly affects, but also to improve the general standard of living of all people living in the area. What is more, it is undeniable that as a result of lifting people out of poverty, those citizens can now live happier lives, those of which have the opportunity now to get an education or contribute to the economy through employment. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to assume that if countries decreased or eliminated troves of spending to develop athletes for international tournaments, problems such as poverty could be solved, leading to much happier citizens and improvements to the economy. Nonetheless, despite the minor drawbacks, it must be stated that by heavily investing in developing athletes, the greater chances of success at an international level can bring fortunes to a country and improve the psychological well-being of its people. For instance, when New Zealand won the America's Cup in 1998, there were not only larger sponsorship deals signed for further competitions, but nation-wide partying and positivity spread throughout the country. Furthermore, there is a general consensus among numerous psychologists that the psychological effects of one's nation winning a major international competition has the added bonus of instilling belief in achieving the impossible, the effects of which can be translated to better work performances. Moreover, success over other competing countries also imparts patriotism and love for one's own country, elements which are fundamental to a nation's economic success. With this in mind, it is without a doubt that if countries were to continue preparing athletes for success on the international stage, the benefits upon a victorious result are impeccably important for the livelihood of the people, and the economic prosperity of the nation. To conclude the aforementioned discussion, while some are under the impression that decreasing spending for training athletes can improve poverty, critics, including myself, would strongly argue that the joys of success at an international level would have a positive effect on people's well-being, as well as improving the economy. From my perspective, the added benefits of beating rival countries at sport can have an overwhelmingly positive effect, and the nation would be happier as a result.