In a salad days of the millennium, the society is polarized into two groups almost equally regarding the notion that financial help should be given to unemployed on a regular basis. Others, however, believe that it leads to economic crises and only encourages them to sit free. Different people have their distinct mindsets. The following paragraphs would shed light on both the approaches before making final note.
To commence with the first notion, there are myriad things to be shared in its favour. First and foremost, after getting some pay from power, unemployed sector will able to get a basic needs like food. As a result, poverty may demolish from a nation. Secondly, with the financial support every poor child will able to achieve beneficiary education. Consequently, improvement in educational field can be seen.
Shifting towards the second school of thought, after receiving regular help they would not like to do any hard work. Hence, it may create more unemployment. Moreover, if regime supply this much salary, then there would be no capital left for other requirements. Therefore, there will be financial crises and the growth rate will decrease dramatically.
Having discussed both arguments and counter arguments, I would like to infer that authority should furnish more training facilities to increase employment instead of providing financial assistance. To justify my state of mind, there is an instance of developed countries which provide more employment opportunities to citizens and they are more stable than developing one. So, there is a need to educate public and help them to get a job.
Hammering the last nail, I personally feel that the union should spend time and fund to create more jobs rather than providing financial assistance to unemployed.
In a salad days of the millennium, the society
is polarized
into two groups almost
equally
regarding the notion that
financial
help
should be
given
to unemployed on a regular basis. Others,
however
, believe that it leads to economic crises and
only
encourages them to sit free.
Different
people
have their distinct mindsets. The following paragraphs would shed light on both the approaches
before
making final note.
To commence with the
first
notion, there are myriad things to
be shared
in its
favour
.
First
and foremost, after getting
some
pay from power, unemployed sector
will able
to
get
a basic needs like food.
As a result
, poverty may demolish from a nation.
Secondly
, with the
financial
support every poor child
will able
to achieve beneficiary education.
Consequently
, improvement in educational field can be
seen
.
Shifting towards the second school of
thought
, after receiving regular
help
they would not like to do any
hard
work.
Hence
, it may create more unemployment.
Moreover
, if regime supply this much salary, then there would be no capital
left
for other requirements.
Therefore
, there will be
financial
crises and the growth rate will decrease
dramatically
.
Having discussed both arguments and counter arguments, I would like to infer that authority should furnish more training facilities to increase employment
instead
of providing
financial
assistance. To justify my state of mind, there is an instance of
developed countries
which provide more employment opportunities to
citizens and
they are more stable than developing one.
So
, there is a need to educate public and
help
them to
get
a job.
Hammering the last nail, I
personally
feel that the union should spend time and fund to create more jobs
rather
than providing
financial
assistance to unemployed.